Help me pick an Arkansas stone

[John C Cox]

Guys,

I want an Arkansas stone to supplement my current sharpening.

I settled on the Worksharp 3000 for grinding and working out dings. I typically go up to 800 or 1000 sandpaper.

From there, I've been using psa film on a granite surface place to refine and remove the wire edge, and then buffing.

I'm pretty tired of the PSA film for finishing. It works well, but leaves a massive load of sticky goo all over the place, And the really fine stuff clogs super fast.

I want something fairly fine but with bite, but I don't want a stone that loads up or clogs in a hurry. I'm not razor finishing, so I don't need an ultra super fine, super slow stone.

I would prefer something I can buy now over spending six months hunting antique unobtanium, if possible.

What do I need? Who should I get it from?

Thanks

[Tom Trees]

Weaver's video, something like "various types of oil stones" was what I was going to link, but it's gone.
There was comparisons on the various types of Washita hones demonstrated, it was a good watch.
Hope he will stick it up on his website some time, https://ofhandmaking.com/sharpening-stone-omnibus/

I suggest you might indeed still be able to find it, by finding a hidden link on the ozzy hand tool forum.

All the best
Tom

[Ben Ellenberger]

Get a hard stone then finish with a strop with buffing compound.

[Jim Koepke]

I want something fairly fine but with bite, but I don't want a stone that loads up or clogs in a hurry. I'm not razor finishing, so I don't need an ultra super fine, super slow stone.

John, it is difficult to make a suggestion without knowing what your plans might be.

Do you want to sharpen a few chisels or do you need a stone to handle wider blades?

What kind of work are you planning to do? Chopping a few mortises is quite different than fine paring work.


I want something fairly fine but with bite, but I don't want a stone that loads up or clogs in a hurry.

Keeping oil on the stone while in use helps to keep the stone from loading up or clogging.

IMO, the oilstone with the best bite is hard to find, the Washita stones have good abrasive properties and good polishing ability. The mines for these have mostly been played out.

For other grades of Arkansas stones, I have been happy with Dan's Whetstones > https://danswhetstone.com/product/bench-stones/

A hard Arkansas may be the right stone for your needs.

The banner across the upper part of the page has specials listed on the right. Those may be worth checking.

jtk

[John C Cox]

Plans wise... I was looking at an 8x2 or 8x3 stone, as I would like the ability to go at plane irons, spoke shaves, and chisels. I haven't had as much trouble with edges on plane irons and spoke shaves as I have with chisels, probably due to my own use cycles. I still mostly jig sharpen those on either my surface plate or on diamond stones.

I don't see as much need for this when setting up chisels for chopping, except maybe to wipe off the wire edges. I can come off the worksharp on P800 at 25 degrees and go straight to the buffer, buff fairly aggressively, and the edge holds up well to chopping. Paring, is a different animal. Do the same thing, and it will pare hard woods ok, but not soft woods. I need a finer bevel angle and to more carefully refine the bevel and remove wire edges so that the edge is ready with only light buffing to get a good, clean cut on soft wood end grain without chipping edges.

Hard Arkansas?

[Rafael Herrera]

If you want an Arkansas with a bite, you may want to try one of Dan's soft Arkansas. That's the closest to a Washita that you can purchase right now.

I've one at home that I got to test, it works, but since I have a decent Washita, I usually just use that one. I don't have one of their hard stones, only their black Arkansas, and that's very very fine, not that useful for regular woodwork use.

[Warren Mickley]

Plans wise... I was looking at an 8x2 or 8x3 stone,

Hard Arkansas?

I recommend an 8x2 stone.

A hard Arkansas would be near useless for you, as it would merely polish the tops of the ridges left by your coarse sharpening.

I would recommend a soft Arkansas. This will give sufficient polish, especially after it has worn some and lost its initial brashness. It would be helpful to have a medium silicon carbide, or a medium India, or a Washita stone. or a water stone in the 800-1200 range. as a preliminary stone before the Arkansas.

I would avoid diamond stones, because the deep scratches take to long to polish out.

[John C Cox]

I would avoid diamond stones, because the deep scratches take to long to polish out.

I have a full set of diamond stones, and yeah... That.

I wish I could get ahold of a quality Washita, but the good ones seem few and far between on the used market, and bring quite a premium. There seem to be plenty of non-labeled stones being sold as Washita, but I don't have enough experience to know the difference.

I decided to try a Soft and Hard from Natural Whetstones. They're kinda vague on whether they're legally "Arkansas Stones" based on crystal structure and density. They call them a hard and soft Novaculite whetstone from Arkansas, but those two in particular seem to receive good reviews from people who know such things, whereas Dans seems to be the go-to for Hard Black and Translucent "Arkansas stones."

Thanks

[Jim Koepke]

…
I decided to try a Soft and Hard from Natural Whetstones. They're kinda vague on whether they're legally "Arkansas Stones" based on crystal structure and density. They call them a hard and soft Novaculite whetstone from Arkansas, but those two in particular seem to receive good reviews from people who know such things, whereas Dans seems to be the go-to for Hard Black and Translucent "Arkansas stones."

Thanks

Not having done research on the subject, the following is only speculation or opinion based on reading things on the internet.

Like > https://www.geology.arkansas.gov/minerals/industrial/novaculite-silica-stone.html

There are different companies processing novaculite from various mines. There is a variance in density (or hardness) and quality.

As John mentioned, Dans seems to be the guy when you want hard stones on the high end of density.

Smith's has a nice softer stone > https://smithsproducts.com/6-medium-arkansas-bench-stone/ < The only problem is the biggest one they list is 6X1-5/8X3/8". I have one and they have carried them at Lowes.

jtk

[Warren Mickley]

Not having done research on the subject, the following is only speculation or opinion based on reading things on the internet.

Like > https://www.geology.arkansas.gov/minerals/industrial/novaculite-silica-stone.html



I don't think the guy you reference has done much research either. Thomas Nuttall brought back samples of Arkansas stones to Philadelphia in 1819. They were already being used as hones at that time despite the fact that Arkansas was unsettled. Holtzapffel mentions Washita and Arkansas stones in his book in 1850, so they had already made it to England. And despite what the author of your article says, Arkansas stones were very popular in the first 75 years of the Twentieth century.

[Rafael Herrera]

One of the references in the Arkansas web site page is a 1890 geological report on the abrasive business in Arkansas at that time. The report can be found online in this website:

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044102940343&view=1up&seq=11

It's an interesting read. From the first mentions of the Arkansas oilstones to the state of the whetstone industry at the time.

One of the key points I derived after reading this report is that not only the novaculite deposits are fairly large, but that only particular deposits yielded good oilstones. These quarries seem to have been identified over time and companies formed around them. The most lucrative stone was the Washita, as opposed to hard or soft Arkansas.

The best Washita quarries are identified in the report, persumably all of them are now owned by Norton. That does not mean deposits with Washita grade stones can't be found somewhere else.

One thing that is brought up often is what is the difference between Washita, soft, and hard Arkansas. These stones all come from the same rock deposits, they are composed of the same thing, very small silica crystals. The compaction of the crystals (density) increases from the Washita to the hard Arkansas. What makes the Washita a good stone is that it is more abrassive than the soft or hard Arkansas.

When buying a stone from one of the current producers, one has to rely on their judgement in the selection of the stones that will make good sharpening stone. There is a perception today that the finer the stone one will get better results. From a practical stand point, when sharpening a chisel, plane iron or a knife, historically, the go to stone to use would have been a Washita or a soft Arkansas.

[Rafael Herrera]

Here pictures of a Dan's Soft Arkansas and a labeled "Fine Lily White"* Washita from Pike.

The first picture shows the unused, factory look of the soft Arkansas. The second picture shows the working side.

515520 515521

This is the working side of the Washita stone.

515522

I'm not going to make a give a review, only that both stones work. Neither one works amazingly better than the other, both have seen little use by me.

They look similar, though. Time will tell how well they do the job.

Rafael

* Washitas came in two grades, when retailed by Pike , Fine/Hard and Coarse/Soft. Coarse was presumably the preferred choice. Also, "Lily White" was the brand used by Pike to indicate their best, guaranteed, stones.

[John C Cox]

The two stones came in on the brown truck of joy. They weren't labeled, so without any better ideas, I checked the density. One stone was 2.16, the second 2.24. This puts the first in Washita land and Soft Arkansas to harder Washita on the other.

I followed up with the vendor on which was which, and the more dense of the two is theoretically the "Soft" stone by color/appearance and the less dense one is the "Hard" stone based on color/appearance. Confused yet?

I suppose that means I get to to test them out to see if I can tell a difference in real life.

[Richard Coers]

When water stones were shipped to the US, I swore off all oil stones. That had to be 30-35 years ago, and I ain't going back.

[John C Cox]

I can see the allure of synthetic stones.

[Jim Koepke]

I can see the allure of synthetic stones.

For me water stones are easier. They are also messier.

My main reason for using oilstones is on curved blades. Gouges have a tendency to gouge water stones. It's not hard to gouge a water stone with a flat blade.

Besides, my shop doesn't have running water and during the winter water in the shop freezes on the colder days.

jtk

[Rafael Herrera]

I started using waterstones. After some time, all the prep work and accessories needed to sharpen something drove me look for an alternative. As a boy I had seen my dad use a simple crystolon to sharpen his tools, so I knew it wasn't a complex process.

In the end I settled for a couple of oilstones, a medium India and a washita, and a strop for everyday sharpening. I use a diamond stones, crystolons, sandpaper or bench grinder when necessary.

I don't have the patience to use nagura stones, soaking, or water tubs, or lapping or going through several grit progressions every time I need to sharpen something.

Nothing wrong with that, I've friends that claim to find it a meditative experience.

[John C Cox]

Ok, so after half a day of testing these, I've got this conclusion:

They are different in a way that's hard to describe, but here goes: Arkansas stones are super fine polishing. The stone they claim is "Coarser" seems to cut with the same fine-ness, but it is just more scratchy in a very not-useful way. The other stone (less dense, but with a very uniform texture) has a really nice bite. It leaves a very fine polish with a lot less scratches.

I think Warren nailed it. Neither of these is really suitable for use directly after my P1000 disc. That would take about 500 years. I need something else to bridge the gap.

[Rafael Herrera]

You have to press harder to make them bite a bit more. Less pressure and they polish.

[John C Cox]

I was using lots of pressure. Compared to P1000 PSA on a surface plate, both stones are way slower... Almost like using P2000 or P3000, except without the problem of constantly clogging the paper. I'm going to try a fine india to knock down machine grinding marks after the worksharp.

I personally don't feel like the more scratchy stone will be useful for woodworking tools, though I could see it might be nice for a knife.

[Jim Koepke]

Almost like using P2000 or P3000, except without the problem of constantly clogging the paper.

My way around clogging the abrasive paper was to wrap a strong magnet in paper. Use this to pick up the swarf. When the paper gets full, open up the paper and lift the magnet out over a trash can. Keeps the paper cutting and the magnet from getting covered with metal filings.

jtk

[Rafael Herrera]

I was using lots of pressure. Compared to P1000 PSA on a surface plate, both stones are way slower... Almost like using P2000 or P3000, except without the problem of constantly clogging the paper. I'm going to try a fine india to knock down machine grinding marks after the worksharp.

I personally don't feel like the more scratchy stone will be useful for woodworking tools, though I could see it might be nice for a knife.

The soft stone should abrade the steel, you can see the black swarf as you sharpen the tool, but this is not like using sandpaper.

--

When I'm refurbishing an old edge, I sometimes use a strip of 80 grit PSA sandpaper and a guide to grind the primary bevel (sometimes I use a bench grinder and then a crystolon). After that I use some kind of medium coarseness media and then it turns into regular sharpenning: medium India (if needed), washita, strop.

I don't use a power sharpener so I don't know what is the state of the edge of your tool after the machine you're using. I would guess most power sharpeners are pretty aggressive compared to a medium India, where it is that I start most of the time.

If you're familiar with the feel of a fine India, then the washita and the soft ark will feel even finer (or harder) than the India, not by much.

I can post pictures of a chisel bevel after worked on the washita and soft ark if you want.

[Robert Hazelwood]

I was using lots of pressure. Compared to P1000 PSA on a surface plate, both stones are way slower... Almost like using P2000 or P3000, except without the problem of constantly clogging the paper. I'm going to try a fine india to knock down machine grinding marks after the worksharp.

I personally don't feel like the more scratchy stone will be useful for woodworking tools, though I could see it might be nice for a knife.

Fine India is perfect for this- sets up a soft ark very nicely

[John C Cox]

The Fine India should be here soon.

I keep hearing folks say that arkansas stone brands make a big difference.

What brand do I need to be looking at for a soft Arkansas? Norton? Dan's? Preyda? Best? Anybody else?

Same for Hard Arkansas? Norton? Dan's? Somebody else?

Thanks.

[Robert Hazelwood]

What I know about Arkansas stones is mostly from David Weaver. He would buy tons of stones and write at length about them on various forums. He also had some good youtube videos I'd point you to but he has taken all of them down it seems. Anyways, his advice from 8-10 years ago was that Dan's was best for a new hard/translucent stone (finer, more consistent), but that their soft arkansas was a little slow/fine-cutting for what he wanted a soft ark to be (medium/middle stone). He was recommending Natural Whetstone instead, since it was a little more aggressive, and cheaper.

I took his advice and got an 8x3 soft ark from NW that I really like, and a Dan's 8x2 translucent that is also great. I've never owned any other arkansas stones so I can't say much beyond that.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Ok, so after half a day of testing these, I've got this conclusion:

They are different in a way that's hard to describe, but here goes: Arkansas stones are super fine polishing. The stone they claim is "Coarser" seems to cut with the same fine-ness, but it is just more scratchy in a very not-useful way. The other stone (less dense, but with a very uniform texture) has a really nice bite. It leaves a very fine polish with a lot less scratches.

I think Warren nailed it. Neither of these is really suitable for use directly after my P1000 disc. That would take about 500 years. I need something else to bridge the gap.
It is usually worth listening to Warren.

I have a "black" which basically just polishes in my experience, and another one that raises a bur in just a few strokes. I can't remember what they sold it is (hard maybe?). It is coarser than the black, but certainly not something I would describe as "scratchy in a very not-useful way."

Anyway, I wonder what kind of steel you are trying to sharpen. My modern stuff is O1, so maybe guys who have tried A2 or the other new steels can help shed some light on how Arkansas stones work on the new steels.

[John C Cox]

Nothing fancy steel wise. Modern Buck Bro's, blue handle Marples, and a pre-WWI Sorby firmer as a sanity check. They all do the same thing.

The fine India does a nice job on the machine marks.

I would love to find a black Ark like you describe... Something that will cut (relatively) faster and raise a burr pretty quick, rather than just polishing for eons. Any chance you remember where you got it?

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Nothing fancy steel wise. Modern Buck Bro's, blue handle Marples, and a pre-WWI Sorby firmer as a sanity check. They all do the same thing.

The fine India does a nice job on the machine marks.

I would love to find a black Ark like you describe... Something that will cut (relatively) faster and raise a burr pretty quick, rather than just polishing for eons. Any chance you remember where you got it?
The cutter is not black sort of a speckled gray. I guess the way I wrote that it sounded like they are both black.

The box the gray one is in says it is a “hard Arkansas.” I got it from Dan’s.

I also have a fine India, which I agree is a good stone.

[John C Cox]

I think the problem I'm having is that I'm full flat bevel sharpening. No micro-bevel, no hollow grind. As such, the Arkansas stones are acting like a nice, hard rock made of 3 micron particles with the main difference being how many scratchy defects are in the stone. Probably, if I was hollow grinding or micro-beveling, they would behave more like what is expected based on the porosity/density.

*Sigh*

This means I need something intermediate to bridge the gap from the fine India if I'm going to get any use out of Arks, but it also means my quest is becoming more trouble. The only thing I see on the market right now in that vicinity is water stones. Maybe a Shapton Glass 2000?

[Warren Mickley]

I have sharpened full flat bevel without grinding for over fifty years. Your main problem is buying these hard Arkansas stones without intermediaries. You can easily go from a fine India to a soft Arkansas, even a medium India to a soft Arkansas. In fact a medium India/soft Arkansas combination stone could satisfy all your needs. I don't recommend black or translucent Arkansas stones for beginners.

A Washita stone is also a good intermediate stone. Good stones for sharpening a flat bevel include India stones, silicon carbide stones (crystolon and carborundum), and water stones in the 800 to 1200 range. Save the Arkansas stones for polishing an already sharp tool.

[John C Cox]

Something in my process could be amiss, or perhaps I got bad stones.

I checked the density of both stones I got from Natural Whetstone. One was 2.16 and the other 2.22. That puts them both on the soft side of "Soft Arkansas." Interestingly, the more dense of the two seems slightly faster, but it's also more "scratchy." The less dense one is very uniform and polishes more than cuts.

On Jim's recommendation, I picked up a cheap Smith's "Arkansas stone". It's pretty brash, and has a lot of boo-boo's on the face. I'm going to give it a once over on a diamond plate to knock down errant high spots and try that one again. Initial impression, the feedback of the stone is nice, but it feels "harder" against my tools than the ones from Natural Whetstone. Finish was similar to the other two - very slow and not really removing fine India scratches quickly. This may be improved with flattening.

I've got a genuine Norton soft Arkansas on order, so we'll see.

Also in the works is some actual honing oil. Maybe it matters, maybe it doesn't, but I started on soapy water and moved to "Smith's honing fluid" which is what I can buy locally, but it's water based. Nobody around here sells "Sharpening Oil" anymore, so I'll try a 50/50 mix of baby oil and odorless mineral spirits.

[John C Cox]

Ha! They're called "Oil stones" for a reason.

All three of my Arkansas stones are completely different animals when lubed with WD-40 instead of water or water based stuff. In fact, they cut better the more I used them. It's almost like the oil deglazed the stone.

So... Method. With oil... I honed my Chinesium Buck Bro's chisel across the bevel on the India stone till all the lengthwise scratches were gone. Then tested an Ark, back to the India to reset the scratches crosswise, and so forth.

With oil, they're 100% COMPLETELY different stones. Good feedback. All 3 will make a burr. They're reasonably fast to clean off all the scratches from the India grit, and fairly easy to tease off the burr. All three leave a dullish mirror finish.

In order of fastest speed/best results:
NW "Soft". The beige/swirly grain rock that was hateful with water was the best of the 3 with oil. It's faster by maybe half than the NW "Hard," and leaves a far less scratchy finish, and it's easiest to tease off the burr. The current winner.

Smiths. Speed maybe a bit slower than the NW Soft, but it had a few uglies that left scratches. If you want to try an Ark, buy one of these, but lap it before you use it. Use it with OIL, not their "Honing fluid" or you'll hate the thing. Lapping went fast. This is a good "Entry" stone.

NW "Hard." The white/uniform rock was slowest of the 3 but also left the scratchiest finish, but the scratches were shallow. You can feel this when working the stone. This one also has sort of weird feedback. Sections of the stone feel like it's fairly slick and there's nothing happening, then the scratches are gone. Other sections feel distinctly rough. I think this stone could use some more lapping, but gosh, lapping it is hateful.

There's a moral to the story in here somewhere...

[Rob Luter]

I can see the allure of synthetic stones.

Agreed. Once I discovered Shaptons I was hooked. Spritz and go is nice, and boy do they cut.

[Rafael Herrera]

Brand new stones have relatively rough faces. They will settle down and smooth over time. You may want to use them for a while to get an actual feel for them.

[Rafael Herrera]

Honing oil has been a subject of intense debate in the past. It very interesting the difference in performace you got when using water.

I use food grade mineral oil, which I buy in gallon jugs. Baby oil, sewing machine oil, laxative oil, are also other names for mineral oil. FG mineral oil is thin, clear and odorless, which I prefer to some other honing oils which are cut with solvents and can have a strong smell.

--

I need to make a correction regarding the soft Arkansas stone I posted pictures of earlier. It's not a Dan's soft. It's an "Arkansas Abrasives" brand soft Arkansas I bought from ebay, no idea of the quality of the stones produced by this company. I only have a black Arkansas and a translucent from Dan's.

I do have a Natural Whentstones soft I got after talking to David Weaver, he did take down all his videos. He has a blog and there are some whetstones articles in them.

I made a video yesterday using this stone re-sharpening an Ashley Iles chisel. The video ends after I got a good burr.


https://youtu.be/9IP--pFLUTs

[John C Cox]

Honing oil has been a subject of intense debate in the past. It very interesting the difference in performace you got when using water.

I saw many of the same posts. I'm just calling it as it happened. ;)

I didn't have any honing oil handy, so I tried water, soapy water, and a water based "honing fluid." All I got was polishing with no cutting aggression.

There was a night and day difference with oil.

I've run into similar sorts of things like this that made me scratch my head. For example, both my DMT diamond plates, and my old Case Moonstone ceramic stone cut WAY better with spit than with water, oil, windex, or combinations of such. They're different stones on spit.

I didn't test the Arks on spit... Oil worked very well.

I guess that's just how it goes.

[John C Cox]

Just to circle back around after trying several out, here's my summary:

Arkansas stones, including soft, are finishers. They are not the stone to use to work out chips, sort out geometry, or deal with machine grind marks. The soft Arkansas stone comes AFTER a fine India or P800 sandpaper. A good soft arkansas will leave a dull mirror finish lacking visible scratches.

The Norton Soft Arkansas I got stands apart from every single other Arkansas stone I tried. It is aggressive, fast, and leaves a really even finish pattern. You can go hard and cut fast, then reduce pressure to wipe off the burr and and polish the bevel. It is everything I wanted in an Arkansas stone EXCEPT it needed a bunch of lapping to flatten it. This stone is fast to the point that I have to watch my technique or I will wreck geometry quick. Absolutely a winner, BUT it needed a lot of lapping to deal with a pretty significant belly. You can get an 8" combo stone of one of these glued to a Medium India for considerably less than their 8x2x3/4 soft ark bench stone. I didn't go that route, but it seems like a pretty good deal.

The Smith's 6" available at Ace and Lowes would be my recommendation if you want to try out an Arkansas stone on the cheap. If nothing else, this stone will give you a fairly good idea of what to expect out of soft Arkansas stones, it is pretty well behaved, and it's pretty cheap locally. It will need to be lapped, but it goes pretty quick on a coarse diamond stone. If you try it out and say "Yuck" - there's no point in bothering with Arkansas stones, and you're not out a fortune.

Dan's Hard stones are fantastically flat and come in with a nice surface texture. Seems like a lot of people use these as a next step after a fine India. If you don't have the gear to lap a stone, this is a great way to go. I'm sure this will settle down with more use, but it is really nice.

Natural Whetstone. Slow, soft stones which leave a scratchy finish AND need a lot of work to get flat. Mine glaze pretty quickly, but can be improved somewhat by lapping across the stone with 180 or 220 grit. Other people have gotten good stones from these guys but I don't recommend based on what I got.

[Rafael Herrera]

Can you send pictures of your norton soft Arkansas?

[John C Cox]

I would love to, but as a member here, I can't post pics or do PM's. I'd be happy to snap a few and shoot them to you if you have some other method of contact.

[Warren Mickley]

I would love to, but as a member here, I can't post pics or do PM's. I'd be happy to snap a few and shoot them to you if you have some other method of contact.

You can post pictures on the forum, just not see them.

[Rafael Herrera]

I'm just curious John, I have not handled a Norton soft Arkansas, but from looking at pictures on the Internet they look white without any spots on them. Norton owns the quarries where the Lily White Washitas were extracted from. They came up with that brand name because the stones where uniformly white when freshly made. When one finds a labeled Lily white stone, they are not white and rather yellowed. This is one of the labeled Lily White stones I own, after lapping, nothing like the stones below.

516506

Norton had a brief run in 2008 of what they branded as Lily Whites. They had a brief run of "Washitas" in 2020, but they were not all white. I just wonder what these Norton's softs are, are they extracted from the Lily White deposits? Who knows.

Lily Whites from 2008. (picture from Internet)
516497

Washitas from 2020. (picture from Internet)
516498

A side by side of a stone I bought with a vintage Washita, new Washita on left side.
516499

Marketing pictures of Norton Soft Arkansas (SB8) (pictures from Internet)
516500516502

I know that color alone is not the correct way to judge the stone quality, but the similarity of the SB8s above, the 2008 Lily Whites, and your description of your stone, makes me wonder.

P.S. Can you see the pictures I'm posting? If not, becoming a member might be worth it.

[John C Cox]

Ok, well, here's a try. The stone is the least dense Arkansas stone I have, at 1.97. The Dan's hard is 2.45 and a Norton Translucent is 2.68. The stone is "white" with fine, light gray mottling and very light rust colored smoke like streaks. It is hard to get a good pic because the figure is white on white.

Here's a picture of the unused side, dry, and then next to a Norton translucent ark.
516512
516513

[Rafael Herrera]

Thank you. Once they're used, they darken, not much one can do about it. Yours looks nice. A nice box and it'd be ready for the bench.

Where and which size Norton soft arkansas did you get?

If 1.97 is accurate, that's a pretty coarse stone. When I measured the specific gravity of my washitas, all of them hovered around 2.3.

If the weight given here is for the stone itself, this is a 2.08 SG stone, that's within the Washita range. Tempting to give it a try.

https://www.amazon.com/SB8-SOFT-ARKANSAS-BENCH-STONE/dp/B0006NDPT4

[John C Cox]

Yeah, mine is getting gray on the other side from use. That's the one I got. Same vendor.