JNS 300 vs SG320?

[Choppin]

in short: is the JNS 300 worth the price premium over SG320?

I’m looking for a hard 300ish stone for light thinning. I love how my SG500 performs, I just wish it was a bit faster for this application. So the SG320 seems like an obvious choice and gets good reviews here.

I’m also considering the JNS 300, as it seems hard and well rated as well. Is it worth the price tag or should I just get the SG320?

(another contender is the Gesshin 320 s&g but I’m in Europe for the next few weeks and shipping/taxes might be prohibitive).

Thanks!

 

[Cliff]

I have both the SG320 and the JNS300. I tend to use the SG for edges and the JNS for thinning; they are both great and work fine at both applications. It feels as though you get more stone with the JNS, but I'm not sure how long they last relative to each other. I think the SG is more precise and better at showing low spots, the JNS better at cleaning up coarse scratches and hiding imperfections.

 

[myguidingmoonlight]

Within two months of thinning I'm already half way through my SG220. Meanwhile the JNS300 is still nice and thick after a whole year of use.

Yeah, I'd reckon the JNS300 last five times longer than the SG320. The glass stones are thin and sexy, but they don't last really long.

 

[mrmoves92]

I don’t have a JNS 300 to compare to, but I have some thoughts that might be helpful. I really like my SG500, but I really dislike my SG320. For me, it loads up and stops cutting quickly while thinning/removing coarser scratches. I don’t know if others have the same issues with their SG320s, but that is my experience with mine.

 

[Matus]

I have the SG500 (great stone) and also the SG220 - and they are a good combo IMO. The 220 wears a bit slower than say Bester 220 (pink). Obviously - price for the lifetime is not the best with the SG stones - but to me the main attraction is the ease of transport. With SG stone holder you can transport 3 stones - and a combo like 220, 500 and 2000 allows you to sharpen almost any knife you may encounter.

I have recently used the SG500 and it did not have issues to remove the scratches from the Bester 220. And yes I agree - the SG500 is probably the best from the whole series.

EDIT: I of course did not answer your original question. I can not give you a direct comparison between JNS300 and SG320, though I would assume that the SG320 is going to be harder. The JNS 300 is IMO not really about the speed. Yes it will help (over a 1k stone) to quickly bring a super dull blade back to life, but it is not hog steel like 220 or 240 stones usually do. At the same time it has a lot finer and more even scratch pattern - as long as you keep the edges chamfered it will not give you any nasty scratches. So it works well in removal scratches from coarser stones and is a good precursor to JNS800 or even JNS1000 stones. I think of it as a great stone in a kasumi progression that is also great for sharpening, but was not developed for ultimate speed and material removal.

 

[NickMinton]

I have both the SG320 and the JNS300. I tend to use the SG for edges and the JNS for thinning; they are both great and work fine at both applications. It feels as though you get more stone with the JNS, but I'm not sure how long they last relative to each other. I think the SG is more precise and better at showing low spots, the JNS better at cleaning up coarse scratches and hiding imperfections.

Agree with all points

 

[OkayMode]

I have both the SG320 and the JNS300. I tend to use the SG for edges and the JNS for thinning; they are both great and work fine at both applications. It feels as though you get more stone with the JNS, but I'm not sure how long they last relative to each other. I think the SG is more precise and better at showing low spots, the JNS better at cleaning up coarse scratches and hiding imperfections.

Agree with all points

Thirded, but I want to emphasise the point about the JNS 300 hiding imperfections.

You really need to ensure you have set even bevel geometry before you get to this stone in your progression, because it will do an excellent job masking those low spots and any other inconsistencies, potentially requiring you to drop back down to your coarsest stone once it becomes apparent later in the progression. It has caught me out a few times now.

 

[Choppin]

Thanks all, very helpful comments!

Reading @Cliff and @Ok__mode_6953 's comments, I think the SG320 would be better for my application. I'll use this stone as my first stone on knives that need light thinning BTE or small geometry adjustments (i.e. the bevels are almost flat, no major low spots, but not quite there yet). So being able to clearly see the low/high spots is important, and one of the reasons I like the SG500.

Yes a ˜200 stone would be faster, but I don't mind spending more time with a stone that feels less coarse, leaves shallower scratches and is easily flattened with an Atoma (I use glass + SiC powder for my 200's, less convenient IMO).

On SG's durability: I'm on my second SG220 and I agree that if you use it for thinning it doesn't last long. The stone is dense and doesn't dish much, but it's only 5mm thick - thinning and flattening will wear it down. I wish they made a double-thick SG220 for 1.5x the price of the SG220 lol.

 

[daveb]

The JNS 300 was my only low grit stone for a couple years. Tried the JKI 400 and couldn't find the love, had the Bestor 500 first but did not like it at all.

The Shapton Pro took over the low grit duties when permasoaking the JNS became inconvenient, then the SG stones. Most recently I've been using the Nanohone for low grit repair and liking them a lot. Better than the Shaptons for thinning as well. Still keep the SG500 busy but I'm exploring the higher grit Nanos now.

Suggest you skip all these steps and go right to the Nanohone 100 or 200 for the low grit stuff. And the JNS is still a good stone to have in your kit, but it lives with soakers.

 

[Choppin]

The JNS 300 was my only low grit stone for a couple years. Tried the JKI 400 and couldn't find the love, had the Bestor 500 first but did not like it at all.

The Shapton Pro took over the low grit duties when permasoaking the JNS became inconvenient, then the SG stones. Most recently I've been using the Nanohone for low grit repair and liking them a lot. Better than the Shaptons for thinning as well. Still keep the SG500 busy but I'm exploring the higher grit Nanos now.

Suggest you skip all these steps and go right to the Nanohone 100 or 200 for the low grit stuff. And the JNS is still a good stone to have in your kit, but it lives with soakers.

Thank's Dave. I agree that diamonds are probably the best option here, I have considered NSK400 but trying to keep costs low right now. Also I prefer the feel of traditional whetstones.

I had a (older version) Nanohone 100 and echo Milan's experience here. It felt slow for me and the surface had some flex, which made weird things to my blade (convexing where I didn't want to). I heard the newer Nanohone's are different in this sense and I want to try a 200 someday.

 

[Cliff]

I don't use the SG320 for major thinning. It's great as a first stone in a sharpening progression and for minor thinning behind the edge.

I got a good Debado 180. That's what I use for heavy lifting. It's fast, and the scratches aren't too deep. SG320 or JNS300 clean up after it quite well.

 

[Choppin]

I don't use the SG320 for major thinning. It's great as a first stone in a sharpening progression and for minor thinning behind the edge.

I got a good Debado 180. That's what I use for heavy lifting. It's fast, and the scratches aren't too deep. SG320 or JNS300 clean up after it quite well.

I've been using a Debado 180 for heavy thinning as well. I also have a SG220 (like but prefer the Debado) and a Sigma 240 (haven't tested it yet).

But I find useful having a less coarse stone for minor thinning BTE, something I can easily jump to a 1k stone and have a decent working finish, or progress to finer grits from that.

I've been using the SG500 for minor thinning (great but a bit slow) and an Imanishi WZ 400 (spot-on speed wise but not too precise, masks low/high spots...). I think the SG320 would do well here.

 

[Cliff]

In your shoes, I'd get the SG -- I've never tried the 320 Pro, but it would be cheaper.

 

[Choppin]

In your shoes, I'd get the SG -- I've never tried the 320 Pro, but it would be cheaper.

I heard the 320 pro is softer and muddier than the SG320, so I assume it wouldn't be as precise (probably masks low/high spots and coarser scratches).

So far I have the SG220, SG500 and SG2000 - don't regret buying any of them, so I guess SG320 is the way to go!

 

[Benuser]

I don’t have a JNS 300 to compare to, but I have some thoughts that might be helpful. I really like my SG500, but I really dislike my SG320. For me, it loads up and stops cutting quickly while thinning/removing coarser scratches. I don’t know if others have the same issues with their SG320s, but that is my experience with mine.

Sounds familiar, some glazing, but when roughing up with a 60 grit diamond pad — I didn't want to use an Atoma 140 — it becomes the most pleasurable coarse SG. Use it these days often after a Suehiro Degado 180. After the SG320 I can use almost anything, even a NP2k or JNS synthetic blue Aoto. Most common is a NP800 though.
With the pad, watch out for outbreaking particles. With a brand new pad, don't trust the mud it raises.

 

[nopomo]

Has anyone been able to compare the JNS 300 to the King 300 Deluxe? The JNS 300 product description sounds like it could just as easily apply to the King.

 

[SwampDonkey]

I heard the 320 pro is softer and muddier than the SG320, so I assume it wouldn't be as precise (probably masks low/high spots and coarser scratches).

So far I have the SG220, SG500 and SG2000 - don't regret buying any of them, so I guess SG320 is the way to go!

I've got the SP 320, it is fairly soft and releases good mud. I spooked myself thinning with it as it dished pretty quickly.

 

[mengwong]

I have the SG220, SG500 and SG2000

The Holy Trinity of Shapton Glass.

I don’t know why SG puts the 16000 in their kit alongside 500 and 2000, when a 220 would make more sense.

https://mtckitchen.com/shapton-glass-knife-sharpening-stone-set-500-2000-16000-and-holder/
(Unitarian Universalists, presumably, stick to just the one 1000 Shapton Pro.)

 

[JustAnotherJoe]

Has anyone been able to compare the JNS 300 to the King 300 Deluxe? The JNS 300 product description sounds like it could just as easily apply to the King.

Can't comment on the JNS 300, but the king 300 delux (there isnt any other king 300 that I am aware of) is a hard stone that wears slowly. I would bet it's scratch pattern is closer to 600 than 300, so it probably isn't the metal eating stone that the rating would suggest. That being said, it's quite the bargain for a splash and go.

 

[Choppin]

Can't comment on the JNS 300, but the king 300 delux (there isnt any other king 300 that I am aware of) is a hard stone that wears slowly. I would bet it's scratch pattern is closer to 600 than 300, so it probably isn't the metal eating stone that the rating would suggest. That being said, it's quite the bargain for a splash and go.

I had a King 300, sold it when I got the SG 220 and 500 duo.

It’s a good stone, gets the job done. I liked that’s it’s hard and doesn’t dish much. Mine was permasoaked as advised my other members here. Some pro sharpeners use it as a cost effective solution.

My only complain is that it’s slower that Shaptons and overall tactile feeling is kinda meh.

 

[kayman67]

You need to work some mud on it with a softer stone. Pretty much all hard low grit stones behave the same. It's a tradeoff.