Advice: introducing different coarse/med stones in my lineup

[inferno]

I have only S&Gs in the med grits: NP800, SP1000, SP2000.

I like all three of them and am not searching to have "better" but "different".

The aim, if not fun of discovering new stones, is stones that are better in a finishing progression, or have other attributes my stones cannot really compete with.

I've been mostly looking at three options, and would likely buy 2 out of 3, or perhaps just one if the feedback seems to indicate it voids the need of any of the other two:

Cerax #700
Cerax #1000
King Deluxe #1200

And let's say the Cerax 700 would help me complete free shipping on a cutting board I'm inclined to purchase - so I'm really inclined to buy that stone too... But I don't care so much in the end, just aiming for the best advice.

Thanks!

it seems like you already have the best stones in this grit range. so why buy more of the same? i've had about 10 different 1k stones. and in the end i only kept shappro/glass/nanipro800/hyper. because those were the best ones. i kinda liked the juumas too but i dont like soakers.

maybe you should look into other grits like 3-4-5k or even 8-12k, and then maybe some coarse stones like 200-ish grits?

personally i dont care about the contrast a 1k stone leaves because the finish is simply too coarse and raspy anyway. at 2-3-4k then it starts feeling smooth and nice.

 

[inferno]

modRQC what stones do you have now and which/why would you like to replace?

also what type of stones do you want?
soft, hard, soaker, s&g, muddy, clean etc etc etc.

 

[ModRQC]

Not replace, and I already came to the conclusion further down that I had already all the most recommended stones or so.

I also have a couple of very coarse stones. As for high grits, since I don't see much point taking my edges past 5K, I'm already well-covered there too, although I will probably buy a higher grit one day just to make sure.

Mainly I just wanted to try different. I don't remember the final order details I passed with Amazon a couple days ago but pretty sure there's a King Deluxe 1200 in there.

If I did remove it at some point, no biggie. I can sharpen and am happy with my stones. Just like discovering, you know.

 

[inferno]

what types of stones do you want to try?

 

[inferno]

these are all nice. a few random stones that are good that you might or might not be interested in

glass 3k and naniwa 2k pro - good finishers for SS, very good balanced stones. naniwa creates very good contrast.

ouka3k - very nice contrast and it feels nice to sharpen on. muddy soft soaker.

cerax 8k - good contrast for an 8k and gets things sharp. muddy soft soaker.

hyper 1k - good soaker, medium muddy, quite hard, slow wearing. soaker.

kit 4k - medium soft resinoid, feels quite nice, get stuff sharp, slower than glass 4k. not a soaker. quite good contrast.

imanishi 10k - quite soft and muddy, soso contrast on clad blades, but very good and even finish on monos. soaker but dries fast.

pro8k - one of the best shaptons imo. gets things truly scary sharp, doesn't clog as much as the 12k or naniwa ss12k, feels nice.
probably my overall best high grit stone for edges.

 

[ModRQC]

Ain't one ever enough...

Thanks for the suggestions. I've also put out feelers for JNS stones. Lots of recommendations for these.

No rush, I'm still learning to get more out of what I already own. I've turned back to my starting point recently - only using SP320 - 1K - 2K or 5K for a progression.

I guess the most obvious hole in my stones is the 3K-4K point - or some 600-800 true to grit. But I don't need them either. More inclined to try more of the grits I use the most - and since I have like 6 different coarse stones, the med point was where I was looking at.

 

[Qapla']

Some ways back there was a review-thread about mid-grit stones: Stone Review Thread - 800 to 2000 Grit Synthetic Stones
Inferno also had his "shootout" thread, but I believe you already have most of the stones it tested.

Here are yet some other ideas:

If you encounter a lot of the more extreme "super-steels", the Sigma Power Select II 1000 [soak] is well-reputed to be specialized for such use. Note, however, that it releases abrasive very easily; therefore if it's used on more "mundane" steels, where the rate of abrasive release is greater than that required to abrade the metal, this results in a lot of material flushed away. I wouldn't recommend it for use on things other than "super-steels".

If you're looking to gamble on the unknown, I vaguely remember that one of your fellow Canucks, Peter Nowlan, in the past often used the Nubatama Gold 1000 [I do not know its water-use status]. However, there are many different Nubatama 1000's and in choosing one you'd have to guess and/or take people's words for things, as there's not much impartial information out there about Nubatama stones.

Are there any natural-stones native to Canada?

I don't know enough about things like synthetic-aoto's to be able to comment on them, but to my knowledge such exist in the 2k-4k range.

Disclosures:
* I have the Sigma Power Select II 1000.
* I have a Nubatama stone, but not a mid-grit one.

 

[dafox]

Ain't one ever enough...

Thanks for the suggestions. I've also put out feelers for JNS stones. Lots of recommendations for these.

No rush, I'm still learning to get more out of what I already own. I've turned back to my starting point recently - only using SP320 - 1K - 2K or 5K for a progression.

I guess the most obvious hole in my stones is the 3K-4K point - or some 600-800 true to grit. But I don't need them either. More inclined to try more of the grits I use the most - and since I have like 6 different coarse stones, the med point was where I was looking at.

How do you like the sp5k?

 

[ModRQC]

How do you like the sp5k?

I’ve only recently started to like it better. Very unforgiving. Straightforward refining in little time and strokes. For more involved results I’d rather use the Rika. I’ve never seen any point to work the SP5K up. I usually splash, clean the edge on the fresh stone, resplash, raise mud with the Atoma and refine. It’s the raising enough mud that changes things for me. It won’t of itself much and is feeling glassy by nature, but with a small layer of thick mud it’s pretty good. You can actually « feel » the refining going on in the way the edge drags through the mud. Or at least I thought I did. As I said, recent development in use, it might not be entirely worked out yet.

 

[M1k3]

I’ve only recently started to like it better. Very unforgiving. Straightforward refining in little time and strokes. For more involved results I’d rather use the Rika. I’ve never seen any point to work the SP5K up. I usually splash, clean the edge on the fresh stone, resplash, raise mud with the Atoma and refine. It’s the raising enough mud that changes things for me. It won’t of itself much and is feeling glassy by nature, but with a small layer of thick mud it’s pretty good. You can actually « feel » the refining going on in the way the edge drags through the mud. Or at least I thought I did. As I said, recent development in use, it might not be entirely worked out yet.

At the end of using the sp5k, clean off all the slurry and swarf. And with as little water as possible do a few edge leading strokes.

 

[KingShapton]

I have only S&Gs in the med grits: NP800, SP1000, SP2000.

I like all three of them and am not searching to have "better" but "different".

The aim, if not fun of discovering new stones, is stones that are better in a finishing progression, or have other attributes my stones cannot really compete with.

I've been mostly looking at three options, and would likely buy 2 out of 3, or perhaps just one if the feedback seems to indicate it voids the need of any of the other two:

Cerax #700
Cerax #1000
King Deluxe #1200

And let's say the Cerax 700 would help me complete free shipping on a cutting board I'm inclined to purchase - so I'm really inclined to buy that stone too... But I don't care so much in the end, just aiming for the best advice.

Thanks!

If you just want to try something different, then you have made a very good choice with the stones.

I myself use the Shaptons (Glass and Pro) as my "main weapon". They are like a familiar tool, I take them blindly and know exactly how to use them in order to achieve really, very good results.

But, as you can tell from my name, I am in 2 camps, both are very different.

As great as the Shaptons are, I like (some) King Stones as well.
My favorite is the King 1200. It's the exact opposite of the Shaptons. With the Shaptons I work with a pressure-based technique and follow a precise process, reproducible results are almost guaranteed.

With the King 1200 you have to work completely differently, preferably without pressure. With the King, I forget every technique, I just concentrate on the feedback (completely different from the Shaptons) and let the stone do its work without applying pressure. The results are very, very sharp (if you do it right).

I have all three medium kings, the 800, the 1000 and the 1200. For me, the 1200 is the best of the three stones.

By the way, the King 1200 benefits from a long soak, 1-3 hours are great. But it also works well with shorter times.

If you "get involved" with the King 1200 and take the time to find out how it works, you will be satisfied! And if you deal with it properly, it is not as slow as many people say.

The Cerax 700 is also a good stone that I use from time to time, it also has very good feedback and gives good results. I just don't use it so often that I can say a lot more about it now.

If you want to try something different, then you are on the right track with your selection.

 

[KingShapton]

I guess the most obvious hole in my stones is the 3K-4K point

If you are satisfied with the King 1200 after a while and like it, then I have another suggestion for this hole in your stone collection.

But that's not what this thread is about, if you like the 1200 King and are interested in my suggestion then PM me.

 

[Blank Blades.]

If you are satisfied with the King 1200 after a while and like it, then I have another suggestion for this hole in your stone collection.

But that's not what this thread is about, if you like the 1200 King and are interested in my suggestion then PM me.

C'mon man. No cliff hangers what's the suggestion? The suehiro ouka?

 

[ModRQC]

If you are satisfied with the King 1200 after a while and like it, then I have another suggestion for this hole in your stone collection.

But that's not what this thread is about, if you like the 1200 King and are interested in my suggestion then PM me.

C'mon man. No cliff hangers what's the suggestion? The suehiro ouka?

It’s a stone thread in the end so yes please have at all your suggestions! I appreciate the input.

 

[ModRQC]

Hey I hadn’t discarded it in the end - nice surprise coming in this morning.

 

[ModRQC]

Can't wait to have some spare time at home tonight... now wondering what knife I shall bring to this stone first. One of my practice knife seems a likely candidate, or the higo pictured above would sure need some work. Boring prospects however.

Victo would be the easiest in terms of differentiation of the stone's behavior: there's no other steel I've sharpened as often on hard S&Gs, it's in between a relative fine grain and relative carbide former, and both chefs have already been brought very thin behind the edge, so easier to judge the speed of the stone also. Moreover exactly the kind of steel I don't care finishing at that grit and using for a while to see what kind of edge is there.

Still pretty boring though...

My Shi.Han 52100 needs a better edge than ootb... a first time stone/steel combo promises to be interesting, if not as much telling.

What do you think - apart that it's all useless deliberation?

 

[Bolek]

If you are interested in somthink rely different look at rubis stones :
https://fr.aliexpress.com/item/3234...earchweb0_0,searchweb201602_,searchweb201603_

 

[ModRQC]

Ok so some work done with the King 1200.

Used it to do “maintenance thinning” on 13C26, just a pretext to see the finish it leaves, as well as sharpen it. Then used on another occasion to sharpen Blue #2.

First the stone was soaked for about 2-3 hours prior to both sessions.

On 13C26 I did some “thinning” from clean state, then some more raising a slurry first with the Atoma. The stone feels better and clogs less with slurry on – no big surprise. That slurry will break down some, but keeps on feeling on the sandy side – not becoming slick. It also doesn’t thicken much from work – what you raise in conditioning is what you get, so to speak. So, very different from a Cerax.

It will however be less thirsty and easily manageable with mud, whereas from clean it dries out too fast, and clogs too easily, to be likeable. Shiny, clearer shade of hazy finish – even with mud. I really thought it would darken more than it does. Scratch pattern is consistent, relatively fine while still on the coarser side of things, I feel pretty ideal towards a Kasumi, probably very effective in covering scratches from coarser stones, and I’m sure it can be refined further more in a real session – not some speedy passes as I did, half of which using no mud.

In behavior stays the same when sharpening: feels better with mud while requiring less water. I wouldn’t call the sandy feeling aggressive, nor did feel the cutting is. It’s slower than SP1K, feels on par with NP800, perhaps a bit faster. Much more forgiving than both. I’ll take the NP800 as a comparison point, as it’s pretty funny how they are similar to each other in being different.

When used from clean, with very little water needed, the NP800 will generate some dark swarfy mud that gets it pretty slick. The King will release a good deal of abrasive, but dries out too fast to naturally turn to usable mud – unless a tight water management would be applied. It won’t be swarfy dark mud neither because the actual swarf tends to clog the stone rather than be kept swimming on the surface. Now, taking into consideration that the NP800 is orangy in color, whereas the King is definitely brown, when forcing a slurry they look formidably the same shade of orangy, with milky pattern throughout. The King slurry sustains itself quite well, while the Naniwa tends to clear out pretty fast. Upon “thinning”, the Naniwa gets more muddy, it’s mud a darker and darker shade of brown. The King, in the same circumstances, actually produces mud that turns a bright burnt orange shade.

The NP800 is obviously very hard, and hard to dish. The King sure is softer, and sure is dishier, but my great surprise is that it isn’t dishy at all, and feels quite hard. I’ve either resurfaced or flattened it about 8-10 times in all (it’s so very easy to flatten), I had some slight dishing in the center twice, yet after all of this and bringing it flat again, it’s still a full 34mm high. I had to re-chamfer only once – and the original chamfer was of the slightest, so in the end, I don’t know that there’s even 1mm gone from it. The exact same regimen of work/resurfacing/raising slurry/flattening on a Cerax 320 – now that’s dishy! – would end up with – what? – certainly 3-4mm loss for sure, easily more if one doesn’t use some caution with pressure. Another way to say this – I know comparing a #320 to a #1200 in dishing is unfair – is that the King releases a great deal of abrasive, for how very little is taken away from the actual surface in the end.

In feeling, the NP800 is smooth, almost creamy; the King is sandier. The NP800 has great feedback, but I’d say the King is top notch with this: the actual sandy part makes all the difference. It’s like a thousand tiny sensors reporting on duty. Sorry if all this sounds naive or perhaps even a bit off – first impressions!