Whats the biggest jump after JIS 600 or 700?

[HRC_64]

The science of sharp said theres no way to go from 300 to a polisher as there are too many micro-chips. So this had me thinking what about the 600-700 range. Is there any decent two stone combination out there that skips a proper "medium" grit? Some folks were discussing the virtues of the glass 500 when used with 3-6k, etc.







(The consolidated grit spreadsheet shows glass 500 as being closer to 600-700 IIRC)

 

[Marcelo Amaral]

My usual jump is from 1k to 3-5k. It works fine for me (toothy enough to do tomatoes with ease, but refined enough to do other skinless vegetables/meat without that tearing feeling from 1k).

 

[ThEoRy]

Yo don't need that 300 grit every time you sharpen though. It's really only for initial bevel setting/re-setting, wide bevel flattening, thinning and chip repairs. It should not be a part of your regular sharpening progression. You are going to wear down the useful life of your knives rapidly if you use it every time as part of your progression.

With that being said, the progression I use on double bevel knives is this:
Gesshin 400 only when needed aka not often
Gesshin XL 1000
Suehiro Rika 5000
Strop on hard felt loaded with 1 micron diamond spray.

You should have no problem going from 1k to 6k either. 1k should be the lowest grit you go to on most of your average sharpening.

Single bevel is quite different. You start getting into higher grits and different stones that are solely for aesthetics.

 

[Dave Martell]

The science of sharp said theres no way to go from 300 to a polisher as there are too many micro-chips. So this had me thinking what about the 600-700 range. Is there any decent two stone combination out there that skips a proper "medium" grit? Some folks were discussing the virtues of the glass 500 when used with 3-6k, etc.

"science of sharp"- I had to Google it

From what I can see that's a razor honer who's splitting atoms vs a kitchen knife sharpener who's splitting onions.....always consider the source.

I see no reason at all that you can't jump from whatever stone to whatever stone, you'll have a result, and you go from there. Don't overthink it.

 

[K813zra]

"science of sharp"- I had to Google it

From what I can see that's a razor honer who's splitting atoms vs a kitchen knife sharpener who's splitting onions.....always consider the source.

I see no reason at all that you can't jump from whatever stone to whatever stone, you'll have a result, and you go from there. Don't overthink it.

Very well said, not that it is surprising, lol.

As to the op, I like the SG500-3k jump. Leaves a mega aggressive edge (read toothy as hell).

 

[HRC_64]

Some people have hinted they believe the technique does work, but obviously the question is with what stones...

 

[malexthekid]

Some people have hinted they believe the technique does work, but obviously the question is with what stones...

You do know the 300 or 6000 the difference is fineness.

You can get the same edge from going 300 yo 6000 as 300 to 1000 to 4000 to 6000. It is just a matter of time and effort.

Also as Dave suggest it all depends on what you are after. 300 to 6000 could leave an interesting mix of tooth and polish of done right

 

[HRC_64]

You can get the same edge from going 300 yo 6000 as 300 to 1000 to 4000 to 6000. It is just a matter of time and effort.

Thats actually not true, which is the point of the OP.

 

[Pensacola Tiger]

Thats actually not true, which is the point of the OP.

And this is supported by what evidence? Certainly not by actual experience of many members of the forum, including myself.

 

[HRC_64]

And this is supported by what evidence? Certainly not by actual experience of ...

Surely you jest, mon ami

 

[malexthekid]

Ummm sorry, but yeah i don't know how to respond...

 

[Pensacola Tiger]

Surely you jest, mon ami

No, I don't "jest". Where is the evidence to support your claim that malixthekid is incorrect in his statement that you can achieve the same result, but that it will take more time and effort?

In fact, "The Science of Sharp" supports this. A 320 grit bevel was given 100 laps on a 16k hone, and "...the edge is similar to that achieved with a full honing progression ending with the 16k."

https://scienceofsharp.wordpress.com/2015/07/09/its-too-big-of-a-jump/

 

[HRC_64]

...

 

[dough]

HRC have you used glass stones before? also wondering what stones you have experience with in general

 

[ThEoRy]

Thats actually not true

No. It's true. It just takes waaaaaayyy too long to get those results. That extra length of time gives you a higher margin of error as well. More time to make mistakes. That's why you chop that time down by using bridge stones. I'm still curious why you want to use a 300 grit stone. That's very aggressive and should only be used as I stated above.

 

[HRC_64]

No, I don't "jest"....

https://scienceofsharp.wordpress.com/2015/07/09/its-too-big-of-a-jump/

PT thanks for linking the article.

I think the mis-conception here is that this is about the finishing stone/sequence.
Its not, its much more about the starting stone and its limits.

Basically the article nicely shows why using 300/16k combo stone is daft.
Which is why the OP is suggesting we debate the merits of alternative stones.

If you closely go thru the linked article agin,
it highlights that the polishing vs chip removal
inefficiency to be >=2.5x

so the takeaway is a good dual stone
needs to be fine enough to not chip/micro-chip

In other words, that was the starting point of the OP.
What are the "roughest" stones that work for this?

(knowing 1000 or maybe 800 is the conventional answer).

 

[HRC_64]

No. It's true. It just takes waaaaaayyy too long to get those results. That extra length of time gives you a higher margin of error as well. More time to make mistakes. That's why you chop that time down by using bridge stones. I'm still curious why you want to use a 300 grit stone. That's very aggressive and should only be used as I stated above.

I agree with a lot of this...I tried to address the answer about the 300 grit in the reply to PT

 

[RDalman]

This makes me think of a guy I considered a bit odd for a while way back, until I understood him. In a swedish knifemakers group grind/sharpening discussion ("scandi" knives) he was saying concave edge is the only edge that works for him/superior. After a good while I understood he was using a tormek with jig, and doing pretty much only woodcarving knives, that he between sharpenings maintained by stropping on sandpaper or something like that. In the same way I've had some talks with razor honers who often are very set on "their way" being the only and superior way. Translating these things from one knife to another, one user/sharpener to another, is false economics imo. You gotta do what works for you. In time you will learn to sharpen in the way that gives you YOUR best performing edge, with the sharpening tools/processes YOU consider works best for you.

For some, a crazy thin stropped hollow ground 120 grit belt edge will work on their tool, which I reason may sound crazy to many guys in here (I do my drills and lathe gouges like that, microbevel sometimes on stones)

 

[_PixelNinja]

Is there any decent two stone combination out there that skips a proper "medium" grit?

Gesshin 600 to Gesshin 6000 and JNS 800* to JNS 6000 are stones that work well as two stone setups and that are recommended as such by Jon and Maxim respectively.

*Technically 800 JIS is a medium stone, don't know if you would consider it 'proper' though.

 

[Razor]

Straight razors can in some cases be a bellwether for other disciplines. They are a very thin backed edge honed at 12-15 degrees. They respond quickly to various media and techniques. Some very skilled honers have state that they perceive a consistent difference when finishing with various Nagura and ending with a slurry essentially the same as the base stone (Tomo). In other words if you add Koma Nagura between Mejiro an Tomo Nagura you get a different result even if you spend more time on the Tomo to make up for the gap. This implies that time is not necessarily the absolute mitigation of grit gaps.

 

[malexthekid]

Straight razors can in some cases be a bellwether for other disciplines. They are a very thin backed edge honed at 12-15 degrees. They respond quickly to various media and techniques. Some very skilled honers have state that they perceive a consistent difference when finishing with various Nagura and ending with a slurry essentially the same as the base stone (Tomo). In other words if you add Koma Nagura between Mejiro an Tomo Nagura you get a different result even if you spend more time on the Tomo to make up for the gap. This implies that time is not necessarily the absolute mitigation of grit gaps.

The key there is perceived difference. The mind is an amazing thing at what it can perceive be it real or imagined.

Aka I would argue this could be a great case of confirmation basis. And in reality the research of science of sharp is more applicable... in at least it will allow you to truly compare apples with apples. Aka did the edges truly get refined to the same point.

Sorry should add I am only skeptical because the theory is very sound on this. They both remove material it is just the rate meaning you can get to the same edge just takes time. Note i fully acknowledge that the practicality of technique has a play here as TheOry mentioned earlier.