+1
I've never used more than a spritz from a spray bottle I keep a my sharpening bench. No need to soak shaptons.
I flatten my with a coarse diamond stone as needed. Maybe every few sharpenings.Originally Posted by Christopher Charles
Contributor
+1
I've never used more than a spritz from a spray bottle I keep a my sharpening bench. No need to soak shaptons.
I flatten my with a coarse diamond stone as needed. Maybe every few sharpenings.
Last edited by Daniel Rode; 09-16-2016 at 3:38 PM.
-- Dan Rode
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle
[OP]
Member
I have the DMT diamond stones as well. As Jim mentioned in his post, they just don't feel like they're doing anything sometimes. They seemed to work really well when I first got them, but got less and less abrasive as I used them. I've scrubbed them with a brush, tried water and oil on them, nothing seems to really help. I was getting really frustrated with sharpening until I tried the abrasive films. I could get to a decent sharpness with them much quicker than with the diamond stones. I wouldn't personally recommend them, at least the DMT Duosharps that I have.
I'll be giving the Shapton's their maiden run this weekend. I just finished several dovetail boxes and need to sharpen most of my plane irons and chisels again. I bought the Japanese versions from Amazon. I got all three for about $170 I think.
Member
That's a pretty good price for 3 Shaptons including the 12k. I have the shapton 1k and 4k and am looking for a higher grit polishing stone, but am debating between another shapton or a natural whetstone.
Do you have a link to the ones you bought (if allowed)?
Contributor
The Shapton Pro 1000 is my go to 1000 stone. I think it is better than the equivalent Sigma. However, I have replaced my Shapton 12000 with the Sigma 13000. I find it cuts the more abrasion resistant metals better - and this is the factor to keep in mind: the Shapton is great on O1 (no gains moving to a Sigma here), but the Sigma is better on A2 and PM-V11.
Regards from Perth
Derek
[OP]
Member
Just go to Amazon and search for "shapton sharpening stones". It seems that the ones officially sold in America (as Shapton Professional) are much more expensive than the ones sold in Japan. If you get the ones with the Japanese words in the name, they're about $40-$70/each, depending on grit. Supposedly they are made for different humidity levels, but that seems specious to me and just a reason to charge us more in the US.
Contributor
I have both shapton and diamond stones. I wouldnt say the shaptonsvare much cheaper on average. Some, but not alot. Im still getting used to the shaptons, but I think I like them better. Cut faster. Time will tell for sure.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
“If you want to know what a man's like, take a good look at how he treats his inferiors, not his equals.”
Member
There are 5 roughly equivalent Sigmas that I know of: Power 1K hard, power 1K soft, S-II 1K, S-II 1200, Power 3F 700. The Power 1K hard is probably the most similar in terms of hardness/flatness, though it's slower and leaves a finer finish.
Shaptons run a bit coarse. The 1K uses (nominally) 15 micron abrasive particles, while the Sigma Power 1Ks are 10-12 microns IIRC. I personally don't find the Shapton to be any better in terms of overall speed vs finish tradeoff - IMO they're just different points on basically the same speed/finish tradeoff curve. As always there's subjectivity involved and reasonable people will disagree.
w.r.t. support for alloy metals (A2, PM-V11, etc) that's the classic binder hardness tradeoff rearing its head. Shapton Pros are pretty hard stones, which is why they resist dishing so well. The downside is that they don't "shed" used/dull abrasive very quickly, and so they slow down quite a bit on tougher steels.
The Sigma 13K also leaves a noticeably finer finish than the Shapton 12K IMO. The Sigma uses ~0.75 um abrasive vs ~1.25 um in the Shapton.
As many people have pointed out, you generally can't compare grit ratings across manufacturers. You have to look at the underlying particle sizes (if/when they're disclosed).
Last edited by Patrick Chase; 09-17-2016 at 11:48 AM.
Contributor
A correction, Patrick ... the Sigma Power 1000 is actually a 1200. I prefer the Pro Shapton 1000 to that. When I was looking for a replacement for my Shaptons, the Sigma Power 1200 was the closest available (this was about 3 or 4 years ago).
Regards from Perth
Derek
Member
I added to my post to clarify that. The "Sigma Power 1000" and "Sigma Select II 1200" (which Stu described as a Power at one point in the past) are very different stones.
In terms of particle size and surface finish the 1200 is comparable to (actually a bit smaller/finer than) the Shapton 1500, not the 1000. The Shapton 1K is actually a 700 if we go by "standard" (JIS 98) ratings.
Last edited by Patrick Chase; 09-17-2016 at 11:53 AM.
Contributor
Jason, the Shapton professional stones I bought more than 15 years ago from the US importer, IIRC all had Japanese writing only on the exterior packaging, so I think I would agree that it sounds like marketing...
Member
Its funny how we have different results
I have the ezelap stones. I bought a shapton 250 (I think. 220? I don't remember...2something) because I was under the impression it would cut faster (for regrinds and edge repair). my diamond stones are 3 years old with moderate weekend use. The coarse curs much faster than my 250
Member
The Shapton 220 is a very hard stone, and consequently doesn't shed dulled/used-up grit as it should. IMO it only works well on fairly soft steels, and is probably the biggest waterstone purchasing mistake I've ever made.Its funny how we have different results
I have the ezelap stones. I bought a shapton 250 (I think. 220? I don't remember...2something) because I was under the impression it would cut faster (for regrinds and edge repair). my diamond stones are 3 years old with moderate weekend use. The coarse curs much faster than my 250
IMO coarse-grit (<1000) Shaptons are problematic in general. The 120 is difficult to use like the 220. The 320 and 500 work very well, but they're fairly quick to dish. That isn't a problem on its own (most coarse waterstones are fairly soft) but the Shaptons also cost an arm and a leg, at ~5X as much per mm thickness as other quality stones of similar grit. That combination makes them hideously uneconomical to use.
I wouldn't recommend any Shapton below #1000 at this point.
Contributor
I would say that they do. I flatten mine after each sharpening session. I can tell they are slightly dished or worn by drawing pencil lines across them and proceed to flattening them. The pencil marks disappear around the sides first, then the center (usually depending if I was using the sharpening jig or not) later as I check the progress. The finer grits need less flattening than say the 1000 grit stone, although I flatten them all while I'm at it.
[OP]
Member
Patrick,
What would you recommend for a really coarse one? The biggest problem I still have is the step between the grinder and the first "medium" grade (like the 1000 stones). My bench grinder technique is lacking. I can get the bevel right and square, but it usually isn't very pretty and may not accurately match the honing guide. I need something that will cut quick enough to get from that to a smooth bevel ready for honing.
Otherwise though, I'm happy with the Shaptons. My plane blade that needed sharpening was the PM-V11 from Veritas. The 1000 was indeed very slow on it, but the three new stones polished it very nicely.
Contributor
Jason, if you are finding the Shapton (Pro?) 1000 slow on your PM-V11, then it must be your sharpening method. This stone is a good one in my view. What do you do?
Regards from Perth
Derek
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote