Shaptons [Archive] - Sawmill Creek Woodworking Community

Dave Cav

11-13-2011, 8:28 PM

Ok, I'll add a drop of Simple Green (or something) to the little spritz bottle I have to spray the stones.

Chris, I was using Scary Sharp but it just got to be too much of a PITA, although it works reasonably well and wasn't too expensive. Years and years ago I tried natural stones but they cut too slow and oil got everywhere. Then I got a couple of King waterstones, but the mess was just too much to deal with. I tried hard felt/cardboard wheels and polishing compound, but it's too easy to really screw up and edge, although I still use it at school to keep the crappy chisels we have there "sharp".

I ordered a big 325 grit Dia-sharp plate from Lee Valley for flattening. It seemed like the best value for it's size.

I sharpened a couple of my (literally) beater Stanley plastic handled butt chisels. The 1000 really takes material off in a hurry, but for really reforming a bevel it's still a little slow. For the initial grind after forming a bevel with a grinding wheel (I use white wheels) it's fine. The 5K and 8K stones really work well for the final sharpening and polish; I think the 8K is plenty fine for everything I will be doing. Can't wait to try it on a plane iron one of these days.

Bill Moser

11-13-2011, 8:41 PM

Ok, I'll add a drop of Simple Green (or something) to the little spritz bottle I have to spray the stones.
Not sure Simple Green is the best idea. I'm not a chemist, but I think soap (like dishwashing detergent) is a base, and bases are "slippery". I think Simple Green may be acidic, but I'm not sure about that, or what the consequences are if used on a water stone. Probably won't explode in a giant fireball, but don't quote me on that :D

Stuart Tierney

11-13-2011, 9:23 PM

Not sure Simple Green is the best idea. I'm not a chemist, but I think soap (like dishwashing detergent) is a base, and bases are "slippery". I think Simple Green may be acidic, but I'm not sure about that, or what the consequences are if used on a water stone. Probably won't explode in a giant fireball, but don't quote me on that :D

Simple Green is not a good idea at all.

Soap, surfactant, ok (but warranty, voided!). Anything else? Well, it doesn't matter, Shapton are not supposed to be used with anything but plain water, but really a drop or two of dish soap is about as angry (chemical wise) I'd do to Shaptons. They're not tough stones, so going with anything that's not been tried by someone with deeper pockets might have you end up with a nice little pile of orange, purple or blue/green silt.

The reasons why plain soap works are because it reduces the surface tension and softens the resin binder quickly, meaning that the surface of the stone is more strongly resistant to aquaplaning and slightly more friable making them work a little faster with less trouble. You do give up some of the dish resistance and hardness of the stones (not always a bad thing) but in exchange get rather nice stones to use. A fair trade off. It makes them work as though they were soaked for 10 minutes prior to use, which is what Shapton recommends but was (conveniently) lost in translation somewhere along the line. But the soap also means that you must clean them off with clear water and get them dry quickly or else they can be harmed because while the soap speeds up the 'workability' of them, it also accelerates the 'point of no return' as well. Use it sparingly, and more than a drop or two of good quality dishwashing soap is too much, wash it off and try again or simply dilute it with an excess of water.

Dave will be here soon to tell you to fix them to a solid base, which is also a good idea. As I said, these stones are not 'tough' and putting a base on them will not only make them tougher to hurt, but will also stabilise them making them more resistant to movement between wet/dry (which is rare to hear about, but happens often enough to be notable). It'll also remove the possibility of the back side being affected by moisture, which makes Shapton Pro stones go kinda, umm, fizzy? I don't know how to describe it, but every time I put mine away slightly damp, the back side has a kind of foam looking stuff, which is softened stone material. Only a tiny amount, but it's there. Comes off with water and a wipe, no big deal.

Also, flatten BEFORE use, clean after. Clean just means getting any black crud off with some water and a wipe with a hand/scotchbrite. You can flatten after use as well which will clean them 100%, but a quick once over before you actually use them again is still the best policy.

Use them well, and so long as you look after them they'll serve you for a good, long time faithfully.

(The above is not a dig at Shapton at all. Just that I've used a few, talked to a few folks and the above is an amalgam of what makes them work best, without hurting them.)

Of course, you can dismiss me as not knowing anything and go on your merry way and probably not have a lick of trouble with them. Shaptons are like that, anyone can get good work out of them, but you need to really try to get the very best out of them.

Stu.

(Who just can't "feel the love" for Shapton, even though I own 18 of their stones. Sorry, just can't quite manage it. But I do like to make sure folks who've got them can milk the best out of them as well... ;) )

Jack Curtis

11-13-2011, 10:16 PM

OK. I just wipe mine off with a rag to remove the swarf.

I think the soap is to counteract their natural tendency toward stiction on western tools.

Jack

Zach England

11-14-2011, 12:46 AM

I think the soap is to counteract their natural tendency toward stiction on western tools.

Jack

Is that why I sometimes feel something like a chattering when using them, especially when flattening backs of wide blades?

Stuart Tierney

11-14-2011, 1:34 AM

Is that why I sometimes feel something like a chattering when using them, especially when flattening backs of wide blades?

Yep, exactly why.

The Shapton Pro stones are impermeable to water, but are affected by it over time. In use, what happens is the blade will float (aquaplane) and/or stick through a 'perfect seal' (stiction) because of the relatively flat surfaces and small amount of liquid in there.

So if you apply a lot of pressure, you'll likely run into stiction which can be combated by changing something more often than not. Either changing the pressure, changing the liquid (amount and/or type), changing the blade's mass (sharpening guide for weight/help adjust pressure) or changing the amount on metal on the stone.

If you apply little pressure, as they're intended to be used then you run into aquaplaning which is combated by the same things i.e; pressure/liquid/mass/area.

Leaving flattening slurry on the stone also helps both conditions since it not only changes the liquid from 'water' to 'slurry' (no matter how thin) but also introduces small particles that will also help enormously.

You may notice than a stone that's been used and is still damp from previous use suffers less from stiction/aquaplaning because the stone is slightly softer, which 'changes the equation'.

As a side note, this is not unique to Shapton Pro stones, but to nearly any 'no soak' stone. The Naniwa Superstones are affected by this to a lesser degree because of their softer binder but they are also softened and become much nicer to use after being soaked. The Shapton Glass Stones, especially in the higher grits suffer terribly from stiction and aquaplaning, but these stones don't change at all with exposure to water, so you'll need to find the fine line where they work best and stick to it.

Soaking stones are much less likely to suffer from stiction or aquaplaning since excess water is pushed into the stone and the porous nature of the stone reduces or eliminates the likelyhood of it sticking through a 'perfect seal'. Any seal created needs to also seal up the entire surface area of the stone to the atmosphere, which is next to impossible.

In my experience, the stiction/aquaplaning problem is only really a concern at above a stated #2000 grit. Below this, the abrasive particles are large enough to reduce any possible problems to be unnoticeable.

Stu.

Jack Curtis

11-14-2011, 3:10 AM

Is that why I sometimes feel something like a chattering when using them, especially when flattening backs of wide blades?

Yes, most likely, as Stu said. Another technique that also helps, although it affects me viscerally to think of it, is to dig some trenches in the stones, kind of like those stone flatteners everyone carries.

Jack

Russell Sansom

11-14-2011, 3:19 AM

Over the years of happy Shaptoning, I've just adjusted to the sticking. In fact, I haven't thought about it for years. I suppose I'm sensing the onset and correcting to avoid it. I'd have to bring myself up to an unaccustomed level of sharpening self-consciousness just to think about it.

I would guess from my experience that if you just keep working, make the kinds of perturbations that Stewy suggests, the annoyance of stiction will fade into the background.

But more to the point, you should enjoy a less cluttered and a more focused sharpening station. If you feel a gap in your grits --- different steels really do want different set of grits sometimes --- it's a fairly easy matter to pop a new one into the line-up. The "no-" soak feature is hard to beat when you need to stop work and touch up an edge. And despite the vague hint that there is yet another sharpening nirvana beyond Shaptons, they will take your tools where you want them to go with very few distractions. Trust them to do so and give them a year or two. If you're like me, you'll find that the search is over.

Wilbur Pan

11-14-2011, 5:28 AM

When I first started using Shapton Pros (1000, 5000, 8000 grit), I had issues with stiction with the higher grit stones, especially the 5000 grit. I found that as I used the stone more, the stiction became much less of an issue. Maybe this is due to getting used to the stone, like Russell mentioned. I also think that there's something about the outside layer of the Shapton Pros as they come brand new out of the box that contributes to this, but once you get past that layer by using the stone and/or flattening it, the stone becomes much better behaved. Sort of like getting past the hard crunchy outside to get to the nice chewy inside. ;)

Paul Saffold

11-14-2011, 6:24 AM

Chris Griggs

11-14-2011, 8:04 AM

"The Naniwa Superstones are affected by this to a lesser degree because of their softer binder but they are also softened and become much nicer to use after being soaked."

Stu, I have a 8000 superstone and thought it was to be spritzed, not soaked. My others are soakers (Norton's 200, 1k & 4k). Your comments appreciated.
Paul

Well, I'm not Stu, but I have yet to encounter a stone that doesn't benefit from being soaked. My Sigma 6k and 10k are no soak, but work better soaked - same goes for my friend's sigma 13k - same goes for Norton 8k. Woudn't surprise me if the same goes for the Super Stones.

BTW, I used to uber opposed to the whole soaking thing, until I realized it was a pretty moot point. Soaking isn't what creates a mess, flattening and using water stones is what makes a mess. A lot of folks, myself included (formerly) equate mess with soaking. Soaking really only adds maintenance if you can't perma soak and even then its pretty small. I'm not convinced at this point that it adds any mess - soak or no soak you still need to wet and lap your stones before each use which will create some mess regardless - the amount of mess is more a function of the type of slurry the stone creates. I will admit though that no soakers take up less space since they you don't need to be kept in Tupperware. As much as I like my Sigs this is actually the one thing that I think I would like about Shaptons better, the ability to put them in a plastic case and put them out of the way. It's a silly little thing, but i really like having the little ventilated plastic case on my Shapton 120.

Hey Stu, you should get sigma to start putting their stones in plastic cases - seriously.

Any, congrats again Dave and thanks for sharing - IMHO, huge improvement over your previous setup. A quality set of ceramic waterstones can do amazing work very quickly, and will be joy to have at your disposal.

(says I who dovetailed 2 and half drawers together this weekend, but chose to use is my little 8x2 arkansas and a cardboard strop for the many chisel and plane blade touch ups required throughout the building, since they can live unobtrusively on my bench. This despite the fact that I have 3 lovely Sigma stones at my disposal that work faster and consistently give me better results [crazy good results, actually], that while I am ecstatic to own sometimes I just don't feel like using, because well, they're waterstones, and sometimes I just don't feel like using waterstones)

David Weaver

11-14-2011, 9:20 AM

Dave will be here soon to tell you to fix them to a solid base, which is also a good idea.

Yeah, put them on something solid and stable. Then the stiction issue isn't really much of an issue as you work with them and get to where you can use them with plain water without a stiction issue (as I do).

I glue all of my stones to bases, except large natural stones, because they're practically as large as a big stone with a base glued to it already. I haven't yet seen a stone that I would want to drop. I did drop a DMT and have to file the corner off of it, but fortunately, that's it.

Stuart Tierney

11-14-2011, 10:32 AM

Stu, I have a 8000 superstone and thought it was to be spritzed, not soaked. My others are soakers (Norton's 200, 1k & 4k). Your comments appreciated.
Paul

Well, there's no official word from Naniwa about soaking Superstones (unlike Shapton who clearly state the Kuromaku/Professional/M-Series stones #5000 and finer must be soaked for best performance), but it's a poorly kept secret that the Superstones benefit from soaking, if only to become a little easier/nicer to use. The soaking softens the surface of the stone just a little more than they normally are, and makes them more forgiving and adds a little extra speed to them. It's not a lot, but enough that you should notice it. Whether you will want to actually do it or not and/or find benefit in soaking them is another thing entirely.

5-10 minutes is more than enough, and certainly no longer. Just placing the stone face down in 1/4" of water (which works for all stones, no need to submerge them) is enough.

You won't permanently hurt the stone by soaking it for a short time, so the best thing to do it try and see what you think.

In other news, Russell is absolutely correct, Shaptons are certainly good stones. I don't especially like them myself in use, but I won't say they're bad stones, just a little less than 'nice' to use and need too much cajoling to coax them into a reasonable facsimile of 'nice'. There's a reason they're so popular, it's because they work and work well.

I don't know about what Wilbur says about getting through to the nice, chewy inside. It's certainly possible, but somehow I can't see it in Shaptons unless the outer surface 'dries out' while in shipping/storage. They're resin based stones, and uniform all the way through. Sigma ceramics certainly change after you get through the hard skin on the outside generally going from "Hmm, these work alright" to "Hmm, these are actually quite nice". It's a subtle thing, and for most folks it could well be that they just get used to what they're using. Only because they're kiln fired at that size, and what's on the outside was essentially a 'hot face' and is different in composition to what's inside. Folks who are very attuned to what stones do tend to make comment on it, generally saying that originally the stones were 'ok-meh' to 'actually quite good'.

(I'm able to go from well used, settled in stones to brand spanking new ones, and older Sigmas have lots of gooey, chewy goodness inside. Especially the 6K. Mr. Sigma Power explained why that happens, and it now makes perfect sense.)

The thing is, that there are very, very few stones that are inherently 'bad' and can't be coaxed into delivering good results. I've only found a handful of stones that I've dismissed as outright 'crap' and a complete waste of money.

Most folks never use them, but some do and some even grow to like them.

Me, I commission a stone instead of getting used to swill and calling it caviar.

(Ok, only one stone so far. However, if all the stones I request turn out similar... :eek: )

And Chris, no cases. I'd rather put my efforts to plugging holes in the range of stones they have. See above. ;)

Stu.

Wilbur Pan

11-14-2011, 10:42 AM

I don't know about what Wilbur says about getting through to the nice, chewy inside. It's certainly possible, but somehow I can't see it in Shaptons unless the outer surface 'dries out' while in shipping/storage. They're resin based stones, and uniform all the way through. Sigma ceramics certainly change after you get through the hard skin on the outside generally going from "Hmm, these work alright" to "Hmm, these are actually quite nice". It's a subtle thing, and for most folks it could well be that they just get used to what they're using. Only because they're kiln fired at that size, and what's on the outside was essentially a 'hot face' and is different in composition to what's inside. Folks who are very attuned to what stones do tend to make comment on it, generally saying that originally the stones were 'ok-meh' to 'actually quite good'.

Actually, that's a pretty good description of what I saw with the Shapton Pros that I have. Out of the box, I did notice that there seemed to be fine lines across the surface of the waterstones that I didn't really know what they were at the time. The drying out phenomenon could certainly explain that. And going from "ok-meh" to "actually quite good" is a very good description of what I found with the Shapton Pro 5000 that I have. Same thing applies to the Shapton Pro 8000, except that it wasn't as annoying to use up front. The Shapton Pro 1000 didn't have these issues.

David Weaver

11-14-2011, 10:42 AM

I also think the shaptons are more uniform, it's likely the familiarity of the user that makes someone think that the stone is changing its feel. When you first get them, things that work on a slick stone (long strokes with no attention to pressure on a big flat bevel) cause some trouble. naturally, as you keep using the stones, you tend to use the stone in the way that it works best, much as an experienced user would use a very hard natural stone (which can be miles harder to use than a shapton stone).

The glasstones even work OK, but there is something about the idea of giving someone 1/3rd or 1/4th of a stone and charging them for an entire one that really bothers me - a lot. Plus, I think the 1k stone was made faster wearing than the pro to make it cut high carbon steel quickly and to make it easier for a first-time user to use. That makes it a 1k stone that doesn't last long (as chris schwartz mentioned in his blog, I guess), and at $40 or whatever it costs, one should be able to get a 1k stone that will last for 10 years of heavy use.

Stu - I think I spied what you filled in with the SP range on your page, and for freehand sharpening japanese tools especially, that should be a very useful stone.

Chris Griggs

11-14-2011, 11:12 AM

Ok, only one stone so far. However, if all the stones I request turn out similar... :eek:

And Chris, no cases. I'd rather put my efforts to plugging holes in the range of stones they have. See above. ;)

Stu.

Oh well, I guess I'll just stick to my Gladware, it works pretty darn good and is probably less expensive than the added cost of case would be anyway.

Archie pointed out that new Sigma to me yesterday, what else are you trying to get them to fill in with, something in the 3k-4k range?

David W, someday I'll have to pick up a high grit Shatpon Pro (perhaps the 12k/15k [same stone, right?] since I don't have stone that high yet), probably out of curiosity more then anything else, I do suspect I would end up soaking it though - have you ever tried soaking your Shaptons just to see if there is a difference/benefit?

BTW Stu, since Shapton recommends soaking do you know if Shaptons can be permasoaked? - just curious.

Stuart Tierney

11-14-2011, 12:17 PM

This is pretty good stuff here, digging at things to work out what works and what doesn't. Cool!

Wilbur, the #1000 Shaptons are uniformly good. They're the one stone (regardless of which one, Pro, M or Glass) that just plain work no matter how ham fisted you are. The #5000, it's the problem child more than any other stone they make and the one that started the ball rolling on my little collection. Basically, someone asked me how to make that stone work, so I got one and did some research. Ended up telling them to soap, slurry, go slow and feel their way into it. Not ideal, but you work with what you have and if it works, it works.

Dave, I can't put into words what I feel about that stone. Not only would it be too much like promotion, but there'd be too many expletives involved.

Here's what happened. 2 weeks after I asked for it, I was told they were being cooked up. A week later, the prototypes arrived. I used one, meh. It grew on me and I'd love to have it up on offer, but not right now.

Tried the second one...

Rubbed some steel across it, put my hand across my mouth, giggled and said "perforated expletive". Got every bit of steel in the place, rubbed away and alternated between dancing, jumping and laughing at it.

It-is-that-good. I can't put it any clearer than that, it's just that good. There's nothing like it that I know about that even comes close.

But really, it was meant for back flattening...

Stu.

Stuart Tierney

11-14-2011, 12:26 PM

Chris Griggs

11-14-2011, 2:03 PM

Next, soft version of the 2K or a no-soak rehash then a 4K, maybe. Got to shift a bunch of the new ones first though. ;)

Oh, and for reference. Your 10K is roughly equivalent in grit size to a Shapton 14K (?), of which doesn't exist. Shapton keep a 'better than the standard' tolerance on their grit sizes, whereas Sigma stick to the standard. You're not likely to see much, if any improvement from a Shapton 12/15K. Borrow one and find out for yourself though, buying one to find out isn't such a hot idea.

And no, Shaptons can NOT be permasoaked. 10 minutes, no more, no less. Less time, less effect. More time, slime. Shapton make that VERY clear in the Japanese instruction sheet included with the stones, more than 10 minutes will permanently damage the stones and extended soaking will destroy them.

(You wonder why I keep mentioning Shaptons as being fragile? There's but one reason...)

Stu.

Intriguing, I take it the 2k is to please the knife folks...

I had kinda assumed my 10k (its the back catalog one, Tamgao-iro) was actually closer to an 8k, not so much from the edge I get (which is very good and as sharp as the wood I work ever needs), but more from the surprisingly fast speed it cuts, the somewhat misty polish it leaves, and just how much farther Archie's 13k takes it from there.

Also, according to LVs grit rating chart, from when they did their Stu like stone comparison, the Sigma Select II 10k is rated at 1.5 micron, which is larger than some 8ks, so I just kinda assumed that my 10k might be in that micron range even though its a different series. The whole grit rating above 8k is actually pretty confusing. While I think there is more to it than this, I kinda wish everyone would just list micron size instead of/in addition to grit, just for the sake of comparing apples to apples. How do you determine a current JIS type grit rating above 8k anyway? For example, I think I've heard you say the Sig 13k is actually a 20k - where does that come from? Is it based on micron size, ultimate edge or something else? And what the heck is Shapton basing its grit rating on, they seem all over the board - that's not a rip on shaptons, I just can't figure it out, and as you may have gathered, I'm just kinda curious about such things, particularly when I get bored at work.

Your right though, I'd probably be better off borrowing someones Shapton 12k/15k, since really there is no practical reason for me to get it - it would be purely out of curiosity, and quite frankly I can't afford to be that curious (as I once again try to talk myself out of the eventual, inevitable and given what I already have probably impractical purchase of a Sig 13k). Then again, very little of the woodworking I do and related purchases I make have anything to do with practicality, what fun would that be:D

Chris Griggs

11-14-2011, 2:31 PM

and older Sigmas have lots of gooey, chewy goodness inside. Especially the 6K. Mr. Sigma Power explained why that happens, and it now makes perfect sense.)

The old sigs really do change a surprising amount. I didn't notice much of a change in my 1k which is of the current line, but my "back catalogue" 6k and 10k both changed a fair bit. Actually I'd say my 10k changed the most - so much so that I have at times wondered if I altered it by premasoaking it. When I first got it was nice as a splash and go and really quite nice after a short soak. Now it's "meh" as a splash and go since and tends to suck up the splash pretty quickly, but even more creamy dreamy than before after a soak.

Stuart Tierney

11-14-2011, 8:19 PM

The Sigma Select II 10K is 1.5 micron huh? Wow. Guess the email and verbal verification I have from Sigma Power must be wrong then, huh? :rolleyes:

The grit ratings on Japanese stones are based on JIS R6001, which specifies how large a grit particle is and the tolerance in size on that grit particle. The problem is that it was updated in 1997 using a new method of measurement and the new standard specifies smaller particles for a given grit rating. It also officially stops at #8000, and anything beyond that needs to be extrapolated, which is quite easy since all you need do is double the grit number and halve the particle size.

The US system of 'grit' is relatively close to the JIS at coarser levels, stops at #8000 as well, but at the higher grit levels specifies much, much coarser particles. CAMI, FEPA, etc, are different again.

Specifying the particle size would be easy, but it's not the done thing. A grit rating tells folks what they need to know, and while it's not always directly comparable, it puts you in the ball park most of the time.

But the standard only specifies the particle size, not what that particle is made from nor how it behaves. That's why you end up with dozens of different stones with the same actual 'grit' rating, but wildly varying performance and behaviour.

Your #10K (and the Sigma Select II #10K) has particles of @ 1 micron ±0.2 micron. Shapton's grit rating system which does not match the new JIS, but is slightly finer than the old JIS, puts #10K as 1.47 micron, with no size tolerance but it's known to be tight. Bring it down a grit level, and a Shapton #12K is 1.23 micron, still not as fine a particle size as your #10K at it's acceptable upper limits.

In use, the Select II is quite hard, has particles that don't break down very much or easily. The Shapton 12K is quite hard, and it's particles tend to break down slowly. As they're quite fine, you get a good polish. Your stone has a mixture of particles that break down easily and some that don't break down much at all combined in a softer binder. So the stone breaks down quickly and cuts quickly, but leaves that misty finish. It's a knife sharpeners stone by definition, and misty is 'in'.

Which one is 'sharper'? Can't rightly say, since that brings in who's doing the sharpening and what's being sharpened.

The really interesting and frustrating grit range is the #4000-6000 though. This is where the particle sizes start to really shrink at a great rate, and there's a mess of stones that based in grit size, fit in this range, but based on the label are out of it. Namely, the Shapton #4000-8000 and Norton #4000-8000.

Take the Shapton #5000 as has been mentioned in this here thread. Nobody says it's a final stopping point, which it isn't. It's a stone that is not really nice to use, until you manage to come to grips with it's M.O. Then, it's ok. The logical stones you'd compare it to are the Naniwa #5000 (Super and Chosera), Sigma #6000 (Select II, ceramic, Jinzo), etc.

The problem is, the Naniwa are 2.5 ±0.4 micron stones. The Sigma are 2 ±0.4 micron stones. The Shapton is a 2.94 micron stone.

I'll stop now, because the Shapton fans will hate anything extra I say here.

Simply put, it's really difficult to hammer home the simple fact that the grit on a Shapton is more directly comparable to a lower grit from nearly any other Japanese manufacturer. Shapton are tied to their grit rating system because if they change it, their old stuff won't match up. Same for King, they are held to the old scale on their old style stones.

I really have a chunk of work to get done, and if I can manage to find the time, I'll make up a proper grit scale chart. It's not an easy thing to do to amalgamate all the oddball scales into one, easy to read chart but I'll try.

Stu.

Chris Griggs

11-14-2011, 9:29 PM

In use, the Select II is quite hard, has particles that don't break down very much or easily. The Shapton 12K is quite hard, and it's particles tend to break down slowly. As they're quite fine, you get a good polish. Your stone has a mixture of particles that break down easily and some that don't break down much at all combined in a softer binder. So the stone breaks down quickly and cuts quickly, but leaves that misty finish. It's a knife sharpeners stone by definition, and misty is 'in'.
Stu.

OOOoooooooooooooohhhhhhhh, that makes sense. Interesting... Well whatever its intent, knives or otherwise, its a stone I have come to really love, very nice to use and the edge it gives lasts a really really long time. I'll be in the middle of a project and think that it's probably about time to resharpen, only to find that the blade I've already used flatten several boards with is still cutting like crazy - this tends to happen several times before I actually need to resharpen. Maybe, all high grit stones do that, I haven't used enough to know, all I can say is that edge longevity more than anything else is where my 10k consistently makes me smile.

Anyway, as always Stu, thanks for taking the time to educate us all and to particularly indulge my borderline OCD curiosity. You're knowledge, humor, and dose of reality is always appreciated.

Archie England

11-14-2011, 9:46 PM

Fantastic post, Stu! Your informative narratives consistently improve my knowledge base so that I can understand the results from use. Thanks. Having used (and liked) the four Norton stones (well, not the 220), I am thrilled with the 1, 6, 13k set of Sigma power stones. These work! I've compared the Sigma 1000 to the Chosera 1k (delightfully harder yet a superb cutter but messy and glazes easily), the Arashiyama 1000 (solid cutter but super messy and too dark to read), and the Bester 1200 (great feel, cuts well, thirsty, and messy). Nice to have friends to loan you stones. All these work! There's not a bad stone in this list--but characteristics of one or the other do tend to appeal to our personalities. Gesshins produce more slurry than Sigmas or Choseras, but they cut approximately the same. Gesshins also are a little softer (don't think soft) but quickly settle firm after a series if passes. So on goes one man's comparisons.... But when $ get mentioned, some lesser expensive stones rise by virtue of price-to-value issues. What's obvious is, most stones work: some work faster, cleaner, quicker, and cut better or polisher better or handle a wider variety of metals than others. Decide what it is you most need, then buy and never look back. A sale is only a deal if you need it. Now, of course, such a constraint should never apply to the spirit of discovery ;-)

David Weaver

11-14-2011, 10:00 PM

Your #10K (and the Sigma Select II #10K) has particles of @ 1 micron ±0.2 micron. Shapton's grit rating system which does not match the new JIS, but is slightly finer than the old JIS, puts #10K as 1.47 micron, with no size tolerance but it's known to be tight. Bring it down a grit level, and a Shapton #12K is 1.23 micron, still not as fine a particle size as your #10K at it's acceptable upper limits.

Wow...there may be some difference between the shapton 12k and the 15k after all. I remember seeing when i bought my US branded 15k that shapton called it a 0.98 micron stone, and the 16k glasstone is a 0.92 stone.

Not that a skilled sharpener would create a different practical edge from 1.23 micron vs. 0.98 micron.

I do, btw, kind of like the 5k stone because it is a bit coarse compared to some other stones that are marked about the same. People either love or hate the 5k shapton. I like it pretty well in a rotation for japanese tools, which is the only place i ever used it...

.. but I'd rather just use a semi-polish fairly soft hiderayama stone given the choice. Same splash and go, nicer feel and more elegant and *should be* about the same price, though that can be difficult to find in a large nice stone. The hiderayama cuts much slower, though, and it's harder to see what it's doing because it leaves a surface that looks finely sandblasted.

Jack Curtis

11-15-2011, 1:00 AM

Stuart Tierney

11-15-2011, 1:46 AM

Stu, what does the following mean?

Sigma Power ceramic stone #400. This whetstone was intended to be a 'bridge' stone between the coarse, aggressive Sigma Power ceramic #120 and Select II #240 stones.

You're saying the new SP 400 is not really a 400, but is somewhere between the SP 120 and Select II 240?

Jack

Missing words... Sorry.

A bridge between the coarse stones and the #700/1000 stones.

It'll do the hard work to, but it was mostly meant to give the #1000 stone an easier time of things coming off the really aggressive stones/grinder. Consistent, predictable and yet, still able to work fast and stay flat and do it at a moments notice, because it's not a stone you use all the time but when you would use it, you want it 'now!'.

And I think Sigma nailed it, 100%.

And it's not locked into a 'system'. It's a stand alone stone. Don't need any particular brand/type of stones, it'll just get in there, do it's job and go back on the shelf.

Stu.

Jack Curtis

11-15-2011, 4:10 AM

Thanks, sounds like a great stone.

Jack

David Weaver

11-15-2011, 9:21 AM

Resin binder with ceramic alumina?

Stuart Tierney

11-15-2011, 10:14 AM

Resin binder with ceramic alumina?

I don't know. Trade secret. I just gave some specs, and they sent the prototype to me and blew my silly little mind.

Sigma don't do resin as a general thing, so it'll either be a vitrified stone with an extra durable binder and lots of it, not burned out when it's made or a 'doped' stone, where they've made a standard stone and soaked it in something so it doesn't need soaking. It feels 'wet', if I can say that. Not all stones feel 'wet', and very few splash and go, but for some reason, it's got that soaker feel without needing a drink.

(If I can get a full line up of no-soak stones that behave like this one, yikes!!!)

There's a SiC version as well, which is kinda soft but silky smooth and stupid consistent. Woodworkers probably won't appreciate it, but it does kasumi finish like not much else I've seen at this grit level. There's just no errant scratches, just smooth haze. It's a full soaker, sintered like the 'Select II' which is what they're all going to end up being. Blame me, I stupidly said "few folks can read the label, so don't worry about it". Lo and behold, they're all wearing "Select II" labels now...

I kinda wonder whether they've specified a different alumina as well. It cuts like fresh diamonds, and doesn't really seem to back off at all like alumina stones normally do.

Interestingly, it's specified to be WA. I've just got a Naniwa #1000 soaker, and it's not WA, but pink. Works real nice, a little soft though and cuts well. I'm kinda wondering if at these coarse (#200-800) grit levels, pure WA makes for faster cutting stone but a greater cost. Got a bit of sticker shock at the price of the things.

I thought this was a Shapton thread?

Stu.

Rob Fisher

11-15-2011, 10:48 AM

...and blew my silly little mind...... I thought this was a Shapton thread?Stu.First, I think you are selling yourself a little short. The brain dump in this thread alone qualifies you out of the silly or little categories. And it may have started out about Shaptons but you elevated it to so much more. Thank you.

Chris Griggs

11-15-2011, 11:27 AM

.. but I'd rather just use a semi-polish fairly soft hiderayama stone given the choice..

Did I read that right???? YOU, David Weaver, would rather have a fairly soft stone:eek:. What gives,everything I've ever seen you say about stones is that you lik'em hard, hard, and harder...???? Also, a semi-polish stone.... Mr. 1k to 15k, skip everything in between;). Is this a change of heart, are we witnessing a new evolution of David Weaver, is it different when it's a natural stone???? Please explain...

Yes, I'm giving you some grief:D, hope you don't mind - it's meant in the spirit of fun, and really I am interested in your response as well. Actually, my assumption is that this is a stone you use on Japanese tools when you have a flat grind and thus a mid grit stone is more necessary, correct? But given your love all stones hard why the preference over the Shapton 5k, is it just a finish thing?

David Weaver

11-15-2011, 11:43 AM

Well, a soft hiderayama isn't nearly as soft (as in how fast it releases grit) as the artificial stones out there that release fairly fast (like the select II or the old kings and nortons).

I'd consider any natural stone that will release grit fast enough such that it's noticeable at all without a nagura or diamond hone to be a soft natural stone. Hard natural stones are much harder than a shapton, and some are so hard that you cannot use them on anything other than extremely fine polishing unless you regularly abrade or condition the surface (some nakayama stones are like that, as are a lot of the hard asagi stones from different mines).

So, soft, but not that soft, because it's not a finish stone and releasing a little grit is good - keeps the stone cutting fresh. A stone that soft as a finish stone (one that easily raises a slurry just by use) is generally considered junk unless there is something really rare about it.

Trouble with my particular stone is that someone sold it to me claiming it is a finish stone, and I paid for it like it was a finish stone, even though I only paid a fraction of what the person claimed they paid from a reputable stone dealer (I paid about $200). Natural japanese stones are a whole pile of curiosity that to any honest person have no practical advantage for woodworking over the new artificial stones. Having played with about 20 finish and semi finish natural stones now (well, maybe more than that), I can comfortably say that, even if there is some appeal to being able to learn a stone and get something out of it that you couldn't when you first got it. For practical purposes, that's just playing around and wasting time. They do leave a visually appealing finish and sometimes have a tactile niceness that a lot of artificial stones have trouble duplicating (that tactile niceness is why I like the hiderayama pre-polisher, even though despite the boasts made by the seller, it is a pretty looking but common 4000 or so grit stone that isn't hard enough to be capable of going finer).

(for western tools, despite all of the stones I've tried, I still like the 1k-15k shapton pair the best. I think the chosera 10k is the nicest overall finish stone - it's blindingly fast and still very fine cutting, but it's extremely expensive and it is not the same stone without a soak as it is when it's soaked - and a magnesia(um?)-based binder means you can't permasoak it).

There are lots of little interesting stones out there to try for anyone who wants to tinker. Fujibato has a really cheap 6k grit no-soak magnesia binder stone that he puts on ebay for <$40 shipped, but despite the little bits about it that make it interesting (it's cheap and has a nice feel), it's like any other tinkering with stones - the guy who has one good set of stones instead of 50 various stones floating around will make his tools just as sharp and have a lot more drawer space left.

Chris Griggs

11-15-2011, 12:13 PM

Thanks for indulging me David. Interesting stuff. It's good to have someone out there to be curious enough to try this stuff for the rest of us and report back. I think between you and Stu there isn't a water stone out there that we can't get some feedback on. Sure saves the rest of us a lot of money.

What is about hard stones you like so much anyway? The only thing I can make a mental comparison too for "REALLY HARD" is a black ark. I do like how easy it is to feel the "click" of the bevel on the hard surface. Is it the same with hard waterstones? I've used Chosera's (1k and below) which I think are considered "hard" but they certainly aren't hard in the same way a hard ark is - the Sig 6k is probably the hardest stone I've used but even that has some creamyness to it.

Mine are pretty soft (I think), you'd hate'em, especially my 10k - IIRC it feels sorta like a Suihiro Rika 5k, but smoother (and maybe a touch harder) - I like it and deliberately went with the older, softer versions of the Sigs for my 6k and 10k when I ordered from Stu since it makes things glide nicely across the stone, but I can see the advantage to a harder stone as well - once again the whole "click" thing.

Its funny, when I was using a guide I didn't give a rat's behind about this hard/soft/smooth/slick/buttery stuff. I remember reading these types of conversations and thinking "giant who cares!!!".... But when I went jiggless, I suddenly realized just how much easier a subjectively good feeling stone could make things.

David Weaver

11-15-2011, 12:35 PM

Yeah, i could use a soft stone with a guide and not care. When I started, I used a guide and kings (as instructed by the charlesworth video - I started right about when that video came out), and I got a nice sharp edge on the very first tool I ever used. I religiously flattened those kings with sandpaper and they are good stones if used correctly. I still have a soft spot for the king 8k, but I don't have any king stones now that I know of.

I like the hard stones because they stay flat and you can control how much grit they lose, and the condition of the grit on the surface of the stone. If I was able to choose any stone in the rotation where I wouldn't care if it was soft, it would be a soft but very fine final stone (like a kiita razor sharpening stone that's not too hard - these are monstrously expensive if they have any size and uniformity). Every stone before that has to be flat or you create extra work for yourself freehand sharpening (but, like you mentioned, with a jig, who cares - adding a few degrees to make a microbevel erases a lot of sins on the surface of a stone, and there is no such thing as stiction or skipping with that).

I like to play with the arks for the same reason - you can control how they cut by what you do with the surface of a stone, and every hard stone provides very direct feedback with what it's doing.

With razors, a hard stone can be scuffed to cut quickly, or burnished with use to create a very dull and fine abrasive that leaves a very nice edge despite the size of the particles in a stone. The same can be done with woodworking tools, though it's nicer to have two finish stones with one that's slurried and the other that's left burnished. Any honest person will admit that a woodworking-appropriate natural stone with a slurry does not cut as fine as a 15k shapton nor as fine as the sigma 13k stone. With some work and an extra step, a very good quality natural stone can be made to cut as fine as those or finer, but when you can take a shaving on the order of 3 ten thousandths of an inch with a simple microbevel from a $90 shapton stone, there's really nothing to be gained.

There are plenty of things naturals don't cut that well, either. They are nice for plain steels, but even my special blue cutting steel planes cause problems on my natural stones, especially the hard ones. Special cutting steel offers zero challenge for any ceramic stone, though.

I wouldn't think of trying to sharpen it on any ark stone that wasn't freshly scuffed.

The arks are fun to play with, but when the rubber hits the road, a 1k/15k shapton combo and a grinder close by spanks them for speed and sharpness (someone with experience and a well worn ark can get that kind of sharpness subjectively on simple steels, but still, it takes more time). Same could be said for someone handy with a jig - it should take more time to get the iron out of a double-iron plane and take it apart and put it back together and set the plane than it does to sharpen it.

Chris Griggs

11-15-2011, 2:20 PM

It's interesting that you say a jig is where you wouldn't mind a soft stone. For me a jig is the one place where I would want the hardest most dish resistant stone I could find regardless of feel, since I can work the whole surface of a softer stone freehand and wear it more evenly. I most definitely wouldn't want a soft dishy stone (although soft and dishy are not always one in the same) when I use a jig, since its too easy to wear it unevenly. However, like you said, on a higher grit stone using a micro bevel I guess that would be a moot point,since you'd only be taking a few swipes.

I feel like what your saying, though it makes perfect sense, is different from what I've heard most people say, which is that soft stones are the ones that let you control the finesse/fineness of the cut/grit since you can work the mud and break down the slurry to get a finer edge than the official grit rating. The thinking being, no mud, nothing to work and nothing to break down. Maybe I've just read to many knife forums, those guys/gals love to play in the mud. I guess, once again its who is doing the sharpening and whats being sharpened, that matters most.

Thinking about my fairly soft 10k though, I would have to agree with your statement about controlling the mud/breakdown/how much grit they lose - I can see how one might have more control of the grit on a harder stone. My soft/muddy 10k releases particles quick enough that I haven't yet figured out how to work it to a finer edge. It's muddy enough that it seems like you would be able to work the mud to another level of fineness, but at the end of the day its just friable enough that (in my hands anyway) its more of a worker than a finessing stone. It punches in at 8 and punches out at 5, does a great job at what it is supposed to do, and sometimes it even works overtime, it works lightening fast for its grit range, but it never ever does anything that isn't in its job description, which is fine since it does what it does so well. I can see how this would be true of any softish,friable stone, but as Stu pointed out earlier I guess it also has to do with how durable (or better yet, not durable) the abrasive itself is.

I'm learning a lot fro this thread, what fun....

David Weaver

11-15-2011, 3:24 PM

Well, that mud exists on a soft stone, but you will likely not break it down much, and when you do, the particles will still be somewhat sharp and rolling around.

A stone that makes no mud at all is releasing very little of the abrasive. Even in the case where there is very little metal swarf, a stone like that will have the top layer of abrasive dull a little bit - exactly what happens to a surgical black arkansas from what I can tell.

Just how much a soft mud breaks down is a very speculative thing, and from what I can tell looking at different edges I've gotten off of different natural stones, the ones where the stone is soft and the swarf rolls around will generally give the type of finish that is very hard to figure out under a loupe. The hard stones will leave straight scratches or a shiny polish. If they don't leave a polish, they're not that fine.

There are older japanese stones that are soft and extremely fine, like some razor hones, and the german eschers are probably a lot like that. Both of them are not that common now.

I don't mind a stone that's a tiny bit hollow on a guide (I camber all but one plane, anyway, to some degree), as long as I know not to try to flatten a back on it. That's why I don't mind a soft stone with a guide, as long as it's flattened regularly enough that the dip doesn't outdo the camber. I microbevel and a ruler trick don't use the middle of the stone on the back of an iron, anyway, and my stones always wear hollow in the middle from use - the edges always are still in plane or close with a diamond hone when I get to them.

In terms of cutting fineness and mud, etc, there are some pictures around the web (I don't know where) of the chinese stone that woodcraft sells. If you make a big mud with it, it cuts surprisingly fast for what it is, but if you let it go to bare water, it polishes very finely. I'm assuming the grit in it is some sort of silica. My hard asagi stones (hard green natural stones) and my antique barber hone both are the same way, though they're finer. They release grit only if you do something to abrade them. As with most razor sharpeners, the finest cut by far is always with clear water on the stone and no swarf. This is also a very slow cut, and I never fully understood the difference until I started shaving straight off the stone - with a mud, even worked finely for a while on a very fine stone, the shave is not so desirable. With bare water for the final laps, the hairs quietly and cleanly come off without any additional abrasives.

The knife guys always like something different than the woodworkers. I don't like sharpening knives on finer shaptons. I don't mind sharpening razors on them, but I don't like it so much, either. The sigma 13k is a bit nicer for razors, and would be a nicer super stone for knives. I do very much like the shaptons for woodworking tools, though. I think most people would like the sigma 13k stone better than the shapton if they weren't doing exactly what I was doing. Maybe I would, too, if I used it more. I know exactly how to get what I want out of a shapton stone, though, and it's not hard to do like it may be to get a super fine edge out of certain natural stones.

Jack Curtis

11-15-2011, 7:55 PM

What does "WA" mean?

Jack

Stuart Tierney

11-17-2011, 5:02 PM

What does "WA" mean?

Jack

White Alundum.

So now it's a short essay on abrasives???

There's basically 2 main abrasives in stones, Aluminium Oxide (alundum, WA, PA, A, AlOx, Alumina, corundum) and Silicon Carbide (C, GC SiC, Carborundum).

Pretty much every sharpening stone available today has either one of these two, in one form or another. Not all, but the overwhelming majority.

The reason for these two being King and Queen is cost, plain and simple. Because they're both so inexpensive, many folks have used them in many wild and wonderful ways, so there's lots of data out there about how to nail a sharpening/grinding stone together and if you decide to try something new and it doesn't work, you've not thrown away a pound of diamonds or something similarly expensive. Maybe a dollar or five worth of dust in a stone sized object.

So, with the two big hitters now named, what's what?

Aluminium oxide is, by far, the most common. It's available in a wide range of particle sizes, is rather hard and tough, and tends to 'wear' rather than fracture. The three main types used in stones are emery, pink alundum (PA) and white alundum (WA), from least refined/pure to most refined/pure. You can also find plain old alundum (A) as a designation, which could be PA or WA or a blend. Who knows? Alumina is also very hygroscopic (like water) so all those nice, no soak stones are going against the basic principles of their primary ingredient. :p

Silicon Carbide is the next most common. It's harder, quite tough but tends to shatter rather than wear like alumina. Once it's done, it's done where alumina will break down and 'polish'. Commonly available in more coarse grits, fine particle SiC stones are not at all common. The green is more pure, harder but more brittle than the black. As such, 'C' (black SiC) seems to work best in stones of very coarse grit (lots of pressure, they don't break because they're tough), GC seems to break down a lot faster in stone use, but will cut pretty much any steel you throw at it.

There are other abrasives out there, and this is a very simplistic explanation which could be improved/corrected by an abrasives white coat type (anorak for the continental types) but generally speaking, every man made stone available uses one of these two abrasives in combination with a binder to stick all the little bits together (or in the case of SiC Select II, no binder since the particles are REALLY nailed together!), possibly some natural type abrasives (from natural stones) and other stuff to give each type of stone it's characteristics. Even the 'type' of abrasive can have an effect, since Alundum and SiC can be made/found/created in different forms with different traits. Just seeing WA on a stone doesn't explain the full story, since there are so many variables, even 10 WA stones can all be different.

Hope that explains it, just a little bit.

Stu.

Jack Curtis

11-17-2011, 7:04 PM

Thanks, Stu, very complete explanation; sorry to not be more conversant on what appear to be common acronyms.

Jack

Stuart Tierney

11-17-2011, 8:03 PM

Thanks, Stu, very complete explanation; sorry to not be more conversant on what appear to be common acronyms.

Jack

Hi --- Jack,

(Put a long space in there so I don't get a knock on the door from some business like folks with dark glasses and bulges in their jackets...)

It's not that well known a thing what's in the stones, aside from some scratchy stuff and something to stick it together.

Many of the stones I have (and sell) do specify what's in them, and if I didn't know what they meant, that would be ridiculous. For you not to know, not a big problem. And in at least asking the question, you learn something new.

(And perhaps I should have stuck an extra smiley in there too...)

Would be a terrible world if we couldn't learn something new as often as possible.

Stu.

(Who learned about 2 new Naniwa stones this week. No, not worth the effort of saying more than that unfortunately... :( )

David Weaver

11-18-2011, 9:36 AM

Stuart Tierney

11-18-2011, 10:00 AM

I couldn't find anything new on the English-language naniwa page, but there's a lot of stuff that's more old school on their site (lobster stones and such) vs. the superstones and choseras that everyone is used to seeing.

Vitrified #220 PA and #1000 PA.

The #220 is soft, but it's big and cheap. The #1000 feels 'dry', and a little too friable (and harsh) for my liking.

"Learned" means "I have them". ;)

Stu.

David Weaver

11-18-2011, 10:12 AM

little too friable

Stu.

I can hardly believe you said this about a stone!

Did you try the 36 and 46 grit stones they have?

I kind of like the "feels dry" stones a little, but they have to be hard (i like the bester stones, even though they feel like coral). Friable stones, to me, are nice with knives...but I don't need to repeat myself over and over about what I like for tools.

I do think those huge coarse stones are interesting, but I always wondered who uses them. All the way back to the big green 200 grit SiC stones that were in every catalog a few years ago. I guess the knife guys use them?

And, as an aside, take a look at 370502534951 on ebay. Not related to stones, but I know you'll appreciate it. Triple the price of what the plane actually costs new, and they don't even offer free shipping!!

Stuart Tierney

11-18-2011, 12:36 PM

The #1000, it's nice enough but the Sig soft takes it outside, beats it senseless and steals it's lunch money. And does it without spoiling it's hair-do. I think it's good for the money, but not much more money gets a much, much nicer stone.

It's not bad, and I know the knife folks will be interested, but still, meh. Just another fish in a big sea, and it's not spectacular enough to warrant much attention.

The #220 is a PA version of the Omura, which is probably what you're thinking of. Massive chunk of stuff, that was marshmallow soft but cut fast. The #220 is harder, faster but still, I gouged the heck out of it for not much result. Ended up taking the chisel to the #120 Sig, then #400 then #1000 Naniwa (testing, testing.)

The ebay listing? Good plane. Right dai grain for the US, 40* bedding, looks in good shape. But yeah, a tad expensive! Yikes.

My mum would say "charges like a wounded bull" and she'd be right.

Beddy-byes for me.

Stu.

David Weaver

11-18-2011, 12:57 PM

Do they sell those funjii planes over there? They were the (good) dirty secret at JWW while they were still carrying them. Very cheap, but a good substantial iron in what is probably white #2 or yellow steel, but a very plain steel that gets sharp. I would guess with the two that I have that they are not that close to the Rc65 they claim, but they are still harder than a vintage US plane iron and a higher quality of steel than all but the original hand forged.

That said, they were a good secret because they were 65 bucks, and require a bit more preparation than a super quality plane, which is a good exercise. And because they were priced at reform-school grade, you could learn on them without treading lightly. They would not be remotely close to being confused with the $180-$200 yamamoto planes that I ran across, though (which are now $300 thanks to the conversion rates), let alone the finer offerings of blacksmith skill in ranges above that. But unlike cheap planes marketed by american firms, they can be used and used well.

But $175 (!!). Wow.

I still have my two, I use one as a jack, and, well, I beat the other one as a test bed for things. No guilt belt sharpening the jack, it's too cheap to worry about. Thanks to the low-quality wide mouth dai, no dai modification needed for jack use, either!!

No clue what to tell people who want to try a japanese plane on a strict budget in the $50 range and little skill now, I hate suggesting tiny planes to a beginner because they are not the same experience as a 65 or 70mm plane.

Anyway, on the stones, I think i'm starting to get swayed by the magnesia bond stones. I like the feel a lot. Too bad you can leave them in water all the time. There is some positive press from the knife people about the white nani 8k (that is separate from the SS and chosera lines), it's also a magnesia stone, and can be gotten for pretty cheap over here, but another stone in that range is the last thing I need, despite curiosity.

I'd love to try the cheap naniwa omura 150 stone sometime, but I don't actually use a stone like that for anything, and there's no reason to put more stones in the drawer. I need to go the other direction. That would be a bevel only stone or a knife-only stone at that softness, anyway.

Chris Griggs

11-18-2011, 1:14 PM

David you're taking about the "snow white" right - yeah a lot of knife folks seem to like it. There's another magnesium stone the CKTG sells, that they just call the Imanashi 10k, that I've been curios about. Wouldn't buy it, no point, but I always kinda wondered if it was meant be a less expensive Cho 10k.

And speaking of Kanna, Stu or David, what would you recommend now for a a first Kanna?

David Weaver

11-18-2011, 1:53 PM

What do you want to do with kanna. Smooth? That's probably your best first choice.

What do you like in a western smoother, #2/#3, #4 or #4 1/2 type planes?

Stu will ream me if I recommend anything other than tsunesaburo, but I would say I'd stick somewhere in the $250 range to start (and just about any quality maker - tsunesaburo, yamamoto, ...), or go way down to the reform school range (<100) because I just don't see the value of the planes in the $150-200 range that have a rough dai and something less than blue #1 that is as hard as they claim it is.

The planes above and beyond the $300 range are a bit esoteric (though there are some that can be called "bargains" in the $450 range, etc), but I have a couple of them. They are interesting, but not necessary and nobody will spot the difference the surface of the wood of a $250 plane or a $600 plane or even a $2500 plane. No assumption should be made about the capability of the planes for normal woodworking in terms of price in a linear manner or any such thing.

That's just my opinion.

Talk of japanese tools can go into space land. I have chisels that are made of Blue #1, White #1 and White #2. I have seen commentary before that chisels of white #2 are to be avoided, but I have some white #2 chisels that have qualities at the edge that no western chisel has, and they are more pleasant to use than any of the other chisels I have. Take anything that is uber expensive or exclusive in recommendation with a grain of salt.

And if you want to start on the budget side of $50-$75, don't be afraid to - the reform grade japanese planes are very capable, and if you get a bum one, the seller can help you make it right. One that is not bum will more than tell you what you need to know.

Chris Griggs

11-18-2011, 2:11 PM

I want to smooth. Generally I don't like large planes for smoothing (love 4's 3's and my LV LABP) partially because of the scale of my work as of late (though that could change). Kanna caught my attention as a way to do final (or near final, as I tend to sand at high grits after planing anyway) smoothing on assembled cases. The thinking being wood body+ lower included angle = less force/friction??? Thus less stress on the case. I don't know how that would actually play out, but that was what got me considering Kanna. I'd probably start with something inexpensive, with a little reading and intruction, I'm sure I could figure out how to feddle/set one up. Just dumped all my extra cash into a new shoulder plane, so I'm not going to buy anything right now anyway, but it is something I remain curious about.

David Weaver

11-18-2011, 3:23 PM

I'm getting the sense that all of these cases are fairly small, so my thought of getting a bigger plane probably isn't as relevant. Low force, maybe something in the 5x mm range, and you can do low angle and (despite the outcry from some) back bevel the iron if you need to. Toshio odate mentions it prominently in his book for dealing with new brittle irons or woods that are hard on the irons. If it's OK to do there, then it certainly wouldn't hurt on figured woods.

Check with stu and see what he can get you in a 55 mm size. By the time you have the corners clipped on the iron (you'll see what I mean) and put a little camber on it if you want, i don't think you'll want to go any more narrow than that. I have a supposedly higher quality but not blacksmith named plane from JWW that is, I think, 42 mm, but it is a tiny plane, and the iron was borderline loose in the dai before I even did anything to fit it. I would not like it for smoothing, and I actually had better experience with the funjii plane, thus the comment about going cheap or going somewhere in the "good stuff" price range.

Just my personal thoughts. I haven't built any furniture smaller than half the size of a refridgerator, so I like the smoothers in the 70mm range (and I don't have big hands), though some prefer 60-65, just because they don't feel like they want a big plane. Once you can get the idea that you apply force with the hand on the back of the plane (and not pulling with the front hand), whether or not you have big or small hands shouldn't make quite as much of a difference. Squeezing and pulling with the front hand feels like an arthritis inducing activity.