Which ceramic stones for sharpening

[Frank Martin]

I would like to try ceramic stones for sharpening chisels and plane blades. Most of them are PM-V11 or A2 steel. I am considering Spyderco and Sigma Power (from Stu that comes in a set of 3 stones and an Atoma plate). I do not like water stones, so looking for stones that don't need as much water as the typical water stones. This is the main reason I am looking into ceramic stones.

Looking for input from people who have experience with these stones to understand which brand has better performance. Seems like Sigma Power stones from Stu (Tools from Japan) may be wider than the Spyderco stones on Amazon...

[Lenore Epstein]

While you're waiting for someone who knows, start with a search for threads on spyderco and sigma; there've been about half a dozen of thorough discussions in the past three or four weeks, and hundreds over the past several months.

[Malcolm Schweizer]

This has been hashed out many times. Any reputable brand is going to get you good results, and that comes from a guy who sharpens knives "semi-professionally" (on the side for money), owns some 30 waterstones, and is himself an admitted "sharpaholic." I can talk microns with the best of them, but really most stones from Sigma, Shapton, Naniwa, and even Norton will get you good results. (Not a big fan of the Norton 220) Shapton Pro and Naniwa Chosera are very good stones. Sigma are good as well. I have heard a lot of good about the Spydercos. I only have their serrated knife sharpening stones. I prefer a waterstone with a slurry over really hard stones, but that's just me.

I suggest getting the best finishing stone you can afford, and get a decent 1000, 3000, and 5000, or something close in range. After you save some more money, get a coarse stone for fixing damaged edges and setting bevels. This is a general recommendation. I say focus on the finer stones and use whatever method for coarse work until you can afford a good coarse stone.

The difference usually comes down to finer details- how fast they cut, how long to soak, how well they make a slurry, or literally microscopic differences in finish. Dont let the countless hashing of these details confuse you. Pick a reputable brand and just make the plunge. Get a good flattening plate like the DMT Dia-Sharp. Mine has lasted years and probably thousands of uses.

My Chosera video has some good info on grit comparisons. I believe grit selection is very important. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V_psHMbYIQQ

[Robert Hazelwood]

I have the Spyderco Ultra-Fine Ceramic, which makes a good finishing stone. Mine is small, about 2" wide, since I bought it originally for sharpening pocket knives. But they make an 8x3 which should be plenty big. Although the stone won't need to be flattened, it does load up with metal swarf quite rapidly, requiring it to be cleaned frequently with something like Barkeeper's Friend in order to keep it cutting well.

When I use the UF it's as a finishing stone in a diamond stone progression. Coarse and medium grits are DMT plates (XC, C, F, XF). I think I would tend to prefer diamond plates for those grits over ceramic. However I've not heard good things about the ultra-fine diamond plates, which is why I chose the spyderco ceramic for finishing. I can't speak personally to the performance of the coarse and medium grit ceramics. I can just vouch for the one I have as an alternative to waterstones.

[george wilson]

I use a diamond plate,then a black Spyderco ceramic,then a white Spyderco. I used the diamond plate to smooth out the white Spyderco initially. The black one was fine as issued. The white one had some permanent ceramic "fuzz"on it which would never go away through use. I ground it off with the diamond plate.

The ultra fine white Spyderco might be a better stone for you if you don't want to bother having to smooth it out before use.

[Tony Zaffuto]

Trick I learned with the Spyderco's, is to give them a few spritzs of water (thanks George). Makes a difference. Also, don't count on the stones being flat-had to use a DMT coarse diamond stone on the white.

[Derek Cohen]

My Ultra Fine Spyderco also required flattening ... about 15 minutes on 250 and 600 Ezelap diamond stones.

The edge off the UF is improved significantly with green compound on hardwood (but then every stone would, I imagine).

Regards from Perth

Derek

[george wilson]

You got unlucky,Derek. Mine was fine out of the wrapper. I did spend a few hours on the regular white one. Or,maybe it just seemed that long. It has been over 25 years,and I can't really recall by now.

[Jeffrey Martel]

I've got that set from Stu and really like it. Haven't tried other sets though, so I can't compare. I don't think you can go wrong by buying them. It really stepped up my game compared to the "scary sharp" sandpaper method I was using before.

[Ryan Mooney]

Comparing the two is slightly apples to oranges.

I use the spyderco completely dry and it works quite well as a bench stone with no water at all. Rinsing it occasionally isn't a bad idea to clear the swarf off but that can be completely asynchronous with the use.

The Sigma (I have the select II's from LV which are almost but not exactly like the ones Stu sells) do like SOME water. I've been known to spit on the 13k one on occasion (don't tell anyone) when just getting a quick bit of shop time before dinner and needing to quickly touch up an edge. They cut a lot faster with a wee bit of water on them, letting them run closer to dry as you progress lets them apply a higher polish (you start reusing grit instead of raising fresh grit).

The Sigma's are MUCH softer, this makes them somewhat more difficult (for me) to use on small carving gouges and other curved carving tools without occasionally dinging the top of the stone or setting in a groove. The spyderco stone is essentially indestructible (so if you have dodgy sharpening techniques its arguably "safer", maybe fix your sharpening approach.. I've been trying).

The Sigma's cut faster, maybe as much as 2x as fast (although I haven't timed them so much ). The 13k is magical and I use it in places where I really should drop back a grit but its still way fast enough.

I think the edge off of the Sigma 13k is somewhat "better" than the spyderco ultrafine. If you strop afterwards the difference pretty much disappears though.

Overall if I had to pick one it would probably be the spyderco because of the problems I have with small gouges/v tools on the sigma. If I never did any carving and was only dealing with bench tools I might have to give the nod to the sigma's because they are a bit faster.

I haven't found the width of either to be a problem (yes the spyderco is a bit narrower but you can easily adjust to sharpen across the stone at a slight angle for wide blades).

[Archie England]

With trepidation, I tread into this thread....


I owe much thanks to many (some here) who have steered me into the ceramic stones for sharpening. I love to use them, and I actually enjoy using multiple steps (my preference) as opposed to those who like fewer.

I've spent a lot of time using Sigmas, Choseras, Besters, Nortons, and a select assortment of numerous others (new, used, begged, or borrowed).

For me, the Sigmas are magical from 6000 to 13000. I was pleased to read the previous post about the comparison of the Sigma and Spyderoc stones (cause I have never tried the Spyderco's). At the 1000 level, the Chosera is very similar in product to the Bester 1200 or the Sigma 1200 (and I consider the Sigma 1200 as faster and better than the Sigma 1000 hard). However, the scratch pattern off the Chosera is much finer than these other two, and more polished. The Chosera 1000 loads up worse and is much more messy; but it cuts really well (as do both the others).

At the 3000 level, the Chosera 3000 is magical. It's a fabulous stone though often unnecessary (as a step) since the Sigma 6k is so handy. The Gesshin 4000 is very comparable, but not as fast nor as fine as the Cho 3k.

Below 800, don't invest in the Chosera line, cause they don't cut nearly as well in the lower grits (okay, it just takes a Cho 400 way longer to do the work and sometimes the 400 just won't cut it). Between the Cho 600 and 800, the 800 is a fabulous stone that could probably replace any 1000-1200 stone because of how well, smooth, and fine it cuts. But, I've got too many already to justify yet another Chosera stone. For blade backs, I'm currently comparing the King Deluxe 300, Cerax 320, and Sigma 400. First, a word of warning: the Sigma 400 will kill a weak diamond stone! It's beast, so to use it you really need a good, really good (Atoma 140) diamond stone. I can't yet say which stone is the best at this level, since all three work amazingly well. The King Deluxe 300 imparts the best polish of the three; the Sigma 400 is perhaps the fastest and best cutting of three. If expense matters, the Cerax 320, second fastest, is perhaps the best bang for the buck. My perception is that all three work bevels very well. The King is most resistant to going out of flat; the Cerax, the muddiest; and Sigma, the fastest. I would love to hear from others about lower grit stones.

I used Norton while learning freestyle sharpening. The Norton 1000 was a marginal stone for me--being much slower and less capable than the others above. The Norton 4000 and 8000 stones, however, are excellent stones. They are not as good as my Chosera or Sigma stones; but, they are good.

Hope you have as much fun with your ceramics, as I'm having with mine.

[Tom M King]

stonessmall.jpgleftsinksmall.jpgbesidesinksetupsmall.jpgI agree with everything Archie just said. My first sharpening stones were ordered from Smith's Arkansas Stones from an ad in one of the Whole Earth Catalogs. This was before I'd ever seen a woodworking magazine, and before Fine Woodworking even existed. I taught myself how to sharpen, and didn't know anything about looking for a wire edge. The result of that was that I taught myself how to sharpen by feel. Since then, "feel" has meant a lot for me still when sharpening something. I still don't bother to feel for a wire edge, but am particular about the "feel" of stones I use. Hard stones like the Syderco's and Shapton's don't do it for me for feel, but that probably makes do difference at all to someone just starting out, and messy stones are just too.....messy, even in a sink for me.

Some of those first stones were broken when a tornado took out a shop of mine, and the stones were thrown out in the yard. Fortunately, the black one didn't get broken, and it's still a fabulous stone. I bought more Arkansas stones. Sometime in the early '90s, I bought my first water stones-the Nortons. I'm in complete agreement with what Archie just posted about them.

Fast forward through all the stone hoing years, and I'm now using the Sigma Powers-mostly. They are Fast, and have the feel I like. I use them in a sink. If I didn't have a sink, I'd be using oil stones.

I'll post some pictures. For me, time is money. The more stones in the progression, the fewer total strokes it takes. I don't do micro-bevels or ruler tricks, or any of that foolishness with fast stones. I'll do micro-bevels if I'm using oil stones, but then when those cutters come to the waterstone setup, the micro-bevels end up taking over the whole face of the bevel.

This setup is in the basement (ground level) of the museum house I'm currently working on. The right sink holds the Sigma Power 400, hard 1000, 6000, 10,000, and 13,000. Sitting up on the edge with the built on base is a Suehiro Cerax 3,000 to fill the 1,000 to 6,000 gap. Behind the faucet is an extra-coarse diamond plate. I don't always use the whole progression, but whichever stone that's started on, and the following ones only take about 10 strokes each. The CBN grinder is a turn around behind me at that sink on an island. If you are a hobbyist for whom time is not That important, the set that Stuart sells is awfully hard to beat. All that's contained in that is in my system shown here. I've never had stones I've enjoyed using any more than these.

I start by running water on the stones. In the left sink is a 9x12 granite surface plate with a 400 Atoma sheet (little over 4x8 inches), and on the left end is an Atoma 140 sheet. Any flattening needed is quickly done under running water-a comfortable temperature of course. That leaves a blank space in the middle, but still in reach of the faucet spout, for a rubber stone holder. The honing is done there under running water. A piece of the synthetic rubber mesh tool drawer liner gets put on the first stone to set the second on, and the same with the third. After three, they get set back in the right sink, and the fourth, etc., etc. It takes longer to type it out than to do the work.

Archie was right about that 400 stone. It's a great stone, but I ruined an Atoma 200 sheet with it. That's what the Carborundum (silicon-carbide)grit and window panes are for.

Sitting beside the left sink is another 9x12 granite surface plate (those were bought for about 25 bucks on sale from Woodcraft, and I really like them-damn flat too) with a block of wood under the back end to tilt it into the sink. On the end hanging in the sink are the .5 and .1 angstrom (or whatever they are-the two finest ones anyway) Diamond Lapping Films. So, ten strokes each on whatever progression of stones, and three swipes each on the film to super, super sharp, and mirror polished-all in less than a minute. I'm not a hobbyist, so time does matter. They're hanging into the sink so the water I splash on them with my hand can just run in the sink.

To the left of the DLF plate is a loose pile of paper towels, a spray bottle of oil, and a push-button start propane torch. After honing, the paper towels take most of the water off the iron or chisel (they're loose so they will be dry by the next time I need them), and a quick brush with the propane flame makes sure, followed by a spritz of oil. Somewhere back there is a bag of Carborundum grit and a stack of old window panes not far away.

It sounds like a lot of trouble, but with this stuff sitting right there ready to go, it's really not. I often have people watching me work, and this always is a hit as a good show to make something sharper than anyone has ever seen before, and mirror polished in a very short amount of time.

[Mel Fulks]

Lot of good detail there carefully described, Tom. Thanks ,I'm sure a number of us will reading it more than once; quality linked with speed merits study.

[george wilson]

I might remind those who sharpen stones in the sink that water stone slurry will possibly settle in the crooks of your drain pipes where they will be insoluble to anything you might try to unclog them. Over a period of time,sludge can build up more than you might think.

[Tom M King]

I forgot to mention the guides sitting beside the sink to the right. There are a couple of Ecllipses. One I bought new a long time ago, and another I couldn't pass up not long ago. The Mark II doesn't really get used with waterstones, but when we're on a job using oil stones and a micro-bevel is faster, my helpers use that. They're hopeless without it, but I don't suggest buying it for use with fast waterstones.

The red one is an old Record with a rounded roller. It gets used for things with a camber when my arms are tired-like a no. 3, or 5, or scrub plane iron.

The LV plane screwdriver is ideal for tightening guide screws. The first Eclipse I bought new got the head of the screw boogered up by me when I was young and foolish. I bought the other one because I always regretted doing that, and it had a good screw head.