Waterstones beyond 8000 grit?

[Hasin Haroon]

I tried out my new Sigma 1000 grit Power Select II stone today for the first time, removing a fairly large nick from a PM-V11 plane blade. WOW, just incredible. The speed, and feedback on this stone is just fantastic.

This got me thinking about their finishing stones. I have Imanishi stones in 4000 and 8000. They do a decent job, even though they are a bit slow and dead when it comes to feedback. For those of you who have 12000 and 13000 (or even higher) grit waterstones, do you see a noticeable difference over 8K? If so, what in your experience is the difference?

[Vincent Tai]

I tried out my new Sigma 1000 grit Power Select II stone today for the first time, removing a fairly large nick from a PM-V11 plane blade. WOW, just incredible. The speed, and feedback on this stone is just fantastic.

This got me thinking about their finishing stones. I have Imanishi stones in 4000 and 8000. They do a decent job, even though they are a bit slow and dead when it comes to feedback. For those of you who have 12000 and 13000 (or even higher) grit waterstones, do you see a noticeable difference over 8K? If so, what in your experience is the difference?

The 10000 grit Sigma PS II is a 1.5 micron particle sized stone and your Imanishi 8000 is 1.2 micron sized stone. So I doubt that you'll get a noticeable improvement with the Sigma 10k other than speed and feedback. I use a 10000 Sigma PSII in most of my sharpening sessions its very nice. I recommended the Iaminishi 8000 to a friend a few years back and its satisfied his needs so far but he mostly sharpens a few knives now and then. I was pleased with the edges he got off that stone. He had a couple hock irons that planed very well. I think I used the Imanishi 8k a couple times one summer but then there was some fibreglass sanded that day so things and my lungs went fuzzy. The 13k Sigma is a really sweet finisher, its a 0.9 micron sized stone - maybe you'll find that it gives a slightly sweeter edge but you'll probably be more easily pleased with the noticeable increase speed and feedback. I really love mine, but I am starting to finish on Jnats more and more. I bet someone has both the Imanishi and the Sigma 13k and can tell you the exact differences. I have a Shapton 30000 which rarely gets used and I usually go to a Jnat for the finest edge I can get. The Shapton 30k is nice I guess, I used it a fair bit for around half a year or more. For a while I had something wrong with my brain where I'd take a jack plane iron up to that stone for fun. There really isn't too much of a difference but I do find when it comes down to final smooth planing, paring, and end grain work I really do love and benefit from the sweeter edge. Pretty much every tool in my shop will come off the 13k Sigma or a J-nat. My Stanley jack plane irons will usually come off the 10k. If you use tests like hair splitting you can start noticing that difference, or when you compare surface finishes.

About your new Sigma 1k PSII; Do keep track of keeping it flat. six or more years ago (when I wasn't as disciplined with keeping stones flat) mines went really out of whack. I had a few nicked blades and getting a few nicks out resulted in the two sides not being parallel once the stone was flattened. So now on one end of my stone it is getting real real thin and the other its got a decent bit of thickness left. It's fast but soft. also if your are flattening tool backs with it you'll easily get slightly convexed backs with the stone if you just go at it for a few minutes. It is awesomely fast though, I know exactly what you felt when getting home from LV and finally finding time to try it.

Cheers,

Vince

[Hasin Haroon]

The 10000 grit Sigma PS II is a 1.5 micron particle sized stone and your Imanishi 8000 is 1.2 micron sized stone. So I doubt that you'll get a noticeable improvement with the Sigma 10k other than speed and feedback. I use a 10000 Sigma PSII in most of my sharpening sessions its very nice. I recommended the Iaminishi 8000 to a friend a few years back and its satisfied his needs so far but he mostly sharpens a few knives now and then. I was pleased with the edges he got off that stone. He had a couple hock irons that planed very well. I think I used the Imanishi 8k a couple times one summer but then there was some fibreglass sanded that day so things and my lungs went fuzzy. The 13k Sigma is a really sweet finisher, its a 0.9 micron sized stone - maybe you'll find that it gives a slightly sweeter edge but you'll probably be more easily pleased with the noticeable increase speed and feedback. I really love mine, but I am starting to finish on Jnats more and more. I bet someone has both the Imanishi and the Sigma 13k and can tell you the exact differences. I have a Shapton 30000 which rarely gets used and I usually go to a Jnat for the finest edge I can get. The Shapton 30k is nice I guess, I used it a fair bit for around half a year or more. For a while I had something wrong with my brain where I'd take a jack plane iron up to that stone for fun. There really isn't too much of a difference but I do find when it comes down to final smooth planing, paring, and end grain work I really do love and benefit from the sweeter edge. Pretty much every tool in my shop will come off the 13k Sigma or a J-nat. My Stanley jack plane irons will usually come off the 10k. If you use tests like hair splitting you can start noticing that difference, or when you compare surface finishes.

About your new Sigma 1k PSII; Do keep track of keeping it flat. six or more years ago (when I wasn't as disciplined with keeping stones flat) mines went really out of whack. I had a few nicked blades and getting a few nicks out resulted in the two sides not being parallel once the stone was flattened. So now on one end of my stone it is getting real real thin and the other its got a decent bit of thickness left. It's fast but soft. also if your are flattening tool backs with it you'll easily get slightly convexed backs with the stone if you just go at it for a few minutes. It is awesomely fast though, I know exactly what you felt when getting home from LV and finally finding time to try it.

Cheers,

Vince

Thanks for the fantastic response Vincent. My sigma was quite a bit out of flat out of the box but it’s soft enough that it flattened really fast. I was picking between the Sigma and the Imanishi when I bought my Imanishi stones. If I had the opportunity to try both first I would’ve gone with the Sigmas. I may pick up the Sigma 13K sometime this year.

[Patrick Chase]

I tried out my new Sigma 1000 grit Power Select II stone today for the first time, removing a fairly large nick from a PM-V11 plane blade. WOW, just incredible. The speed, and feedback on this stone is just fantastic.

This got me thinking about their finishing stones. I have Imanishi stones in 4000 and 8000. They do a decent job, even though they are a bit slow and dead when it comes to feedback. For those of you who have 12000 and 13000 (or even higher) grit waterstones, do you see a noticeable difference over 8K? If so, what in your experience is the difference?

Different makers use different systems, and whether you'll see an improvement from going over 8K depends somewhat on where you're starting. As somebody else just said, the Imanishi/Kitayama 8K is a 1.2 um stone, which is pretty fine. By comparison the Shapton 8K is 1.8 um, and the Norton 8K is nominally 3 um but doesn't cut that rough.

You also have to distinguish whether you care about practical woodworking results or something more "esoteric" like Kez or pointless sharpness testing. You can certainly see differences from going beyond your Imanishi 8K for the esoteric stuff (I have it, and also some higher-grit stuff like the Sigma 13k), but arguably not for actually making stuff out of wood.

[Patrick Chase]

A couple nit-picky replies to Vince's post:

The Sigma 13k is 0.75 um, not 0.9 IIRC. It's noticeably finer-cutting than the Imanishi/Kitayama 8K, but IMO the difference doesn't matter for most real-world woodworking uses.

The Sigma Select II 1K is indeed a very soft stone that dishes quickly. It's also comprised of Silicon Carbide rather than Alumina as in most other mid-grit waterstones. The net result is a stone that does very well with HSS and other steels that contain hard carbides, but it's a bit of a waste when used on ordinary HCS or Chromium-based steels (A2, PM-V11, etc). Sigma also sells the Select II 1200, which is a mid-hardness Alumina-ceramic stone that does reasonably well with "problem steels" but dishes more slowly.

[Vincent Tai]

You could very well be right Patrick, I got my numbers from an old LV downloaded catalogue SS. It has a very noticeable error about the Sigma 10000. I'll freely admit I don't need to go up to my 13000 for a lot of my work but its quite fun. I'll probably drop down to a more reasoned use of my 13000 if I ever grow up soon. I have been going from a king 4000 to a Jnat finisher from So for a lot of my sharpening recently. Trying to get more work done with less time wasted on glorifying edges. I'll try and get my hands on the 1200 II one day, I've heard good things about it.
fullsizeoutput_b9.jpg

[Stanley Powers]

I tried out my new Sigma 1000 grit Power Select II stone today for the first time, removing a fairly large nick from a PM-V11 plane blade. WOW, just incredible. The speed, and feedback on this stone is just fantastic.

This got me thinking about their finishing stones. I have Imanishi stones in 4000 and 8000. They do a decent job, even though they are a bit slow and dead when it comes to feedback. For those of you who have 12000 and 13000 (or even higher) grit waterstones, do you see a noticeable difference over 8K? If so, what in your experience is the difference?

Stropping beyond 8000 would save you money. Easier to keep it sharp, then to get it sharp!