Looking for a Finishing Stone

[Malcolm Schweizer]

Shapton Pro 8000 or higher is what first comes to mind. Naniwa Professional 5000 is a very nice stone, and fairly hard for a water stone. The 10k is very soft, so is not what you are looking for. The Naniwa Lilly White 8k is a great finisher. Also as many have said, the Spyderco ceramics are about as hard as you will find.

I try to base my reply on my experience, and this is what I have experience with. I always say, “If it gets your tools sharp enough it was the right stone for you.”

[Patrick Chase]

Shapton Pro 8000 or higher is what first comes to mind. Naniwa Professional 5000 is a very nice stone, and fairly hard for a water stone. The 10k is very soft, so is not what you are looking for. The Naniwa Lilly White 8k is a great finisher. Also as many have said, the Spyderco ceramics are about as hard as you will find.

I try to base my reply on my experience, and this is what I have experience with. I always say, “If it gets your tools sharp enough it was the right stone for you.”

Naniwa Snow White is a very nice, hard stone. It isn't as hard as the Spyderco and therefore requires periodic flattening, but it leaves a better edge and feels nicer in use (both IMO).

The Chosera/Professional 10K is right up there with the Degussit in terms of cost per unit mass of Alumina.

[Warren West]

Ruby is simply alumina with an impurity (Chromium) that make it red. Unfortunately for Degussit, that impurity does absolutely nothing for its hardness or abrasive properties. It's Mohs 9, just like bulk Alumina. In other words, it's the same abrasive as in the Spydercos and in most synthetic oil- and waterstones.

IMO the Degussit is mostly unique in terms of marketing and appearance. The notion that any Alumina stone could be used to sharpen carbide as they claim is risible, when you consider that commonly used carbides are quite a bit harder than Alumina (including Ruby).

It sure is pretty, though not several hundred dollars' worth of pretty IMO.

Of the stones you listed the "odd one out" is the Ark. That one is comprised of silicate, which is quite a bit softer, slower, and more limited in the steels that it can handle than either of the Alumina options.

True about the Arkansas stone, but it's going to be dish resistant compared to any waterstone. In use the ruby is nicer than the spyderco. Worth it or not is in the eye of the beholder. While it may be the same abrasive as the Spyderco, it's not the same finished product. Everything I've ran across in industrial use indicates it has superior wear resistance. Irregardless probably no one here will buy one, they'd rather own a $400 diamond lapping plate for their dish prone water stones.

[Patrick Chase]

True about the Arkansas stone, but it's going to be dish resistant compared to any waterstone. In use the ruby is nicer than the spyderco. Worth it or not is in the eye of the beholder. While it may be the same abrasive as the Spyderco, it's not the same finished product. Everything I've ran across in industrial use indicates it has superior wear resistance. Irregardless probably no one here will buy one, they'd rather own a $400 diamond lapping plate for their dish prone water stones.

A $50 DMT DiaSharp or $75 Atoma plate does nicely for flattening. Spending $400 on a flattening plate is about as sane as spending hundreds on a certain 10000# Alumina waterstone or a "ruby" bench stone. Also, the current Shapton "diamond flattening plate" is more like $700.

w.r.t. hardness and dish resistance, there's a 3-way tradeoff between that, sharpening feel and speed. Alumina dulls with use, and exposing fresh points is advantageous if you're sharpening hard, abrasion-resistant steels.

Don't get me wrong: I think that basic concept behind the Degussit of a hard, low-maintenance Alumina-ceramic stone is entirely reasonable. That's why I recommended the Spyderco to the OP :-).

[John C Cox]

Even then - they still benefit considerably from an occasional refresh/flatten...

I have a Case Moonstone - one of the earlier ceramics that came out when nobody I knew used anything but Arkansas stones.. And when new - it was fantastic... Magically fast cutting and yet quite fine.. It would put an amazingly fine and keen edge on a knife in a jiffy....

But it is a harder ceramic... Over time - it's performance declined till I did not enjoy using it and it was relegated to the Sharpening Box 'O Shame... Then - I read about flattening stones with diamond plates.. Gave it a go and it was rejuvenated back to it's original glory... And all is right in the world...

[steven c newman]

"Finishing Stone" ? back in the day...I would have used either Pumice or Rottenstone. to rub out a finish......

[Philipp Jaindl]

Over time Diamond plates also get less aggressive, speaking of it i do need a new coarse one my old ones are pretty worn down. Well then i suppose im gonna get the finest Spyderco + Atoma 400 or the DMT equivalent and pick up an Arkansas or some others down the road to experiment with.

Didnt think there would be that much of a discussion about Aluminium Oxide but it is very interessting to read.

[John C Cox]

Phillipp - absolutely diamond plates do get less aggressive over time.... They are not magic.... And I can personally attest that using diamond plates to flatten other sharpening stones does make them considerably less aggressive. Probably why traditionally - there was a separate dedicated flattening stone/lap... Using them to do significant work to High Speed Steel also knocks the aggressiveness out of them..

For me - it seems like the best compromise is to use PSA backed sandpaper and a surface plate for the heavy grinding, flattening, prep, and chip removal work, and then switch to your favorite stones for ongoing maintenance...

[Stewie Simpson]

Phillipp - absolutely diamond plates do get less aggressive over time.... They are not magic.... And I can personally attest that using diamond plates to flatten other sharpening stones does make them considerably less aggressive. Probably why traditionally - there was a separate dedicated flattening stone/lap... Using them to do significant work to High Speed Steel also knocks the aggressiveness out of them..

For me - it seems like the best compromise is to use PSA backed sandpaper and a surface plate for the heavy grinding, flattening, prep, and chip removal work, and then switch to your favorite stones for ongoing maintenance...

John; to be honest I have some major doubts that earlier western craftsmen bothered with flattening their sharpening stones. The vast majority of natural sharpening stones that I have received 2nd hand from the U.K all showed signs of longitudinal dishing (hollowing) on at least 1 primary face. Contentious at it may sound, those wear patterns do in part validate Paul Sellers claim that convex bevels on both chisels and plane irons were historic practice. https://paulsellers.com/2011/12/goin...-myth-busting/

[Jason Lester]

The book, "The Joiner and Cabinet Maker", first published in 1839 (I think) mentions flattening the stones after sharpening using a rough sandstone piece. I think they called it a "rub stone" and would also use it instead of a grinder sometimes (when an apprentice wasn't available to turn it.) One of the no-nos it discusses was to sharpen your tools and leave the stones without flattening for the next person. This was mostly prior to Arkansas-style stones though.

[Stew Hagerty]

Black Arkansas. It'll take multiple generations to wear out. Super hard, super fine, easy care.

And you can't beat Dan's: https://www.danswhetstone.com/product/bench-stones/

[Warren Mickley]

The book, "The Joiner and Cabinet Maker", first published in 1839 (I think) mentions flattening the stones after sharpening using a rough sandstone piece. I think they called it a "rub stone" and would also use it instead of a grinder sometimes (when an apprentice wasn't available to turn it.) One of the no-nos it discusses was to sharpen your tools and leave the stones without flattening for the next person. This was mostly prior to Arkansas-style stones though.

We have used oil stones similar to Arkansas stones for millennia. They are used for polishing. Rub stones are coarse flat water stones like sandstone.

There is no 18th century evidence that craftsmen used sloppy stones. The historical texts and the quality of their work suggests otherwise. The chisels in the Seaton chest have flat bevels.

roubo oilstone.jpg

[Patrick Chase]

Over time Diamond plates also get less aggressive, speaking of it i do need a new coarse one my old ones are pretty worn down. Well then i suppose im gonna get the finest Spyderco + Atoma 400 or the DMT equivalent and pick up an Arkansas or some others down the road to experiment with.

Didnt think there would be that much of a discussion about Aluminium Oxide but it is very interessting to read.

Aluminum Oxide is cheap, hard enough for the vast majority of steels that we actually use, and reasonably fast-cutting. I do almost all of my "in-shop" honing on AlOx stones for those reasons (though I use CBN wheels for grinding).

[Patrick Chase]

Phillipp - absolutely diamond plates do get less aggressive over time.... They are not magic.... And I can personally attest that using diamond plates to flatten other sharpening stones does make them considerably less aggressive. Probably why traditionally - there was a separate dedicated flattening stone/lap... Using them to do significant work to High Speed Steel also knocks the aggressiveness out of them..

You should try diamond lapping films and compounds. The reason plates slow down is because they have a single set of exposed points, that inevitably dull. Also, plates that rely on electroplated nickel binder tend to start out with prominent "rogue particles" (DMTs are notorious for this), and the plate slows down noticeably as those become dislodged.

For the cost of a single lapping plate you can get about 10x the area (10 times as many fresh points) of lapping films, and much more area coverage still with compounds. As an added bonus neither the films nor the compounds have "rogue particle" problems to the same degree as the plates, and they cut more uniformly as a consequence.

[Philipp Jaindl]

Alright i did some read up on the Spydercos, seems that the Fine and UF are the same just different surface grind and the UF seems to be only 3µm so basically the same Grit size as the 2 stones i already have. Also read quite a few times that they didnt come flat and if you do have to flatten them then buying the UF is kinda pointless.

Those of you that have or have used both how does the Spyderco UF stack up against the Arkansas, Naniwas, Shaptons etc. in terms of the finished Edge they produce? They are all about the same price (~80 to 100 €) and I was expecting having to flatten them periodically anyways so as long as they can handle narrow tools without gouging or wearing too easily i can make do

I just want the best edge i can get since im not gonna be stropping afterwards, so which of the Stones in which Grit should i look at ?