# Which grade of Diamond plate for final honing



## Bluekingfisher (5 Jun 2014)

Can anyone recommend a diamond plate for final honing of plane & chisel blades please.

I have a 400 & 1000 grit stone but consider the 1000 grit still too course for final blade honing. If you can recommend a brand or particular type that would be appreciated too.

I am not interested in oil, water or ceramic stones.

Many thanks

David


----------



## Paul Chapman (5 Jun 2014)

Diamond stones are not available in a fine enough grit for final honing. Best to finish with a block of wood and diamond paste or Autosol and oil





Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Cheshirechappie (5 Jun 2014)

I think there may be a slight difference in the way diamond stones work when compared to - say - waterstones. The diamonds are held in a matrix such that they are immovable, and act like a large number of small cutting tools, shaving bits off the workpiece. Waterstones act more by having moving particles rolling around on their surfaces in a slurry of water, acting with rather more a burnishing, polishing action - as much deforming the peaks of the irregularities on the workpiece surface into the troughs on it as cutting bits of it off. Hence the 'finish' from a waterstone (or some fine natural stones) is smoother and more polished than from a fixed-matrix diamond stone. Fixing very small diamonds in a matrix is difficult, hence there are no diamond 'polishing' stones.

Paul's right, I think - release the smaller diamonds so that they act more like rolling polishers on a strop, and they'll give a much better finish.


----------



## Bluekingfisher (5 Jun 2014)

Ah, thanks fellahs, that makes perfect sense.

You've both been very helpful.

Btw - Nice tip with the Autosol Paul.

David


----------



## gasman (5 Jun 2014)

Autosol on MDF works very well too


----------



## woodbrains (5 Jun 2014)

Cheshirechappie":p1kfqhrq said:


> I think there may be a slight difference in the way diamond stones work when compared to - say - waterstones. The diamonds are held in a matrix such that they are immovable, and act like a large number of small cutting tools, shaving bits off the workpiece. Waterstones act more by having moving particles rolling around on their surfaces in a slurry of water, acting with rather more a burnishing, polishing action - as much deforming the peaks of the irregularities on the workpiece surface into the troughs on it as cutting bits of it off. Hence the 'finish' from a waterstone (or some fine natural stones) is smoother and more polished than from a fixed-matrix diamond stone. Fixing very small diamonds in a matrix is difficult, hence there are no diamond polishing stones.



Hello,

I don't think the reason diamonds stones are different than waterstones is quite like this. Waterstones do actually cut in the main. Fraible nature exposes new, sharp, cutting particles and the slurry contains lots of finer broken abrasive, which all cut. The difference is due to 'point count'. There are a lot less diamonds per surface area than the abrasive found in waterstones, so the scratch pattern is much further apart, even if the particle size is the same. DMT actually make a 10000 diamond plate, which is very fine, but he particles are less tightly packed than those in the equivalent water or oil stone, so do not appear to give as fine an edge. I have been dipping in and out of researching polishing metals and I am getting the impression that the lower point count in diamond stones actually cause sub surface damage to the steel, resulting in earlier edge failure of the tool. When I get more time and if I ever get some spare cash to splash out on a 10000 diamond plate, I will do a comparison between it, Japanese waterstone and Arkansas oilstone.

I have used chromium oxide on leather or mdf, which works very well. Japanese stones taken to a fine enough degree, do away with that stropping stage altogether, though.

Mike.


----------



## JustBen (5 Jun 2014)

Didn't Paul Sellers do a video showing that honing/sharpening above 1000g or so makes very little difference to how a blade cuts?

Will see if I can find the link.

Here it is. Sorry it's 250 grit not 1000 grit.

http://youtu.be/UbAo4RpM7oM


----------



## woodbrains (5 Jun 2014)

Hello,

Abrasives are measures in lots of different conventions, so are not directly comparable. The European, Japanese and American systems are not the same, be we get things from all over the world now, so you have to be careful which abrasive is being used.

250 grit in any convention is blooming coarse though. The best thing to do is try sharpening(?) at 250 and then at the finest stone you have available and see if there is a difference. I guarantee there is a significant difference and Paul Sellers is talking some tripe there.

Mike.


----------



## JustBen (5 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":12wxymjm said:


> Hello,
> 
> Abrasives are measures in lots of different conventions, so are not directly comparable. The European, Japanese and American systems are not the same, be we get things from all over the world now, so you have to be careful which abrasive is being used.
> 
> ...



???? 
He just demonstrated that it works fine.

And even if there was a difference, if an old man can't feel the difference (someone who is more likely feel it with ageing bones and muscles), is the extra time/cost worth worrying about?


----------



## Paul Chapman (5 Jun 2014)

JustBen":w1wwike5 said:


> Didn't Paul Sellers do a video showing that honing/sharpening above 1000g or so makes very little difference to how a blade cuts?
> 
> Will see if I can find the link.
> 
> ...



I think that video is very misleading. Almost any level of honing would be OK if you just use mild-grained softwood as shown in the video. A more demanding timber would require a far sharper blade.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## David C (5 Jun 2014)

This video is both self contradictory and misleading.

The fine side of Paul's old Norton stone was 400 grit. Why does he now sharpen with 3 diamond stones and a strop?

A strop was certainly used by many cabinetmakers in the days of oil stones. Why? Because their fine stones were not fine enough.

As Paul Chapman mentions, he chooses to demonstrate with rather superior pine, instead of difficult interlocked hardwood such as quartered Sapele.

I started with the dreaded fine/coarse India stone. Arkansas stones were significantly better and When Japanese waterstones arrived here they were a revalation, being significantly better again.

15, thousand grit is getting to a point that only specialists will appreciate. 8 & 10 thousand grit produce a wonderful edge.

I sharpen with two stones. 8oo King and 10,000 King. No stropping required with stones as fine as these.

There is no way I am going to sharpen my plane blades with 250 grit.

Another point not mentioned is that finer grits produce edges which last longer.

David Charlesworth


----------



## Cheshirechappie (5 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":2n3a98a4 said:


> Cheshirechappie":2n3a98a4 said:
> 
> 
> > I think there may be a slight difference in the way diamond stones work when compared to - say - waterstones. The diamonds are held in a matrix such that they are immovable, and act like a large number of small cutting tools, shaving bits off the workpiece. Waterstones act more by having moving particles rolling around on their surfaces in a slurry of water, acting with rather more a burnishing, polishing action - as much deforming the peaks of the irregularities on the workpiece surface into the troughs on it as cutting bits of it off. Hence the 'finish' from a waterstone (or some fine natural stones) is smoother and more polished than from a fixed-matrix diamond stone. Fixing very small diamonds in a matrix is difficult, hence there are no diamond polishing stones.
> ...



Interesting stuff, Mike! By the sounds of it, your research is more advanced than mine. Certainly, the density of cutting edges - 'point count' - does sound like a significant factor, though I'd stick by my suggestion of a 'rolling' particle having a more burnishing than cutting effect. The overall picture is obviously more complex, with some abrasive systems being a combination of the two, and some being biased more to either cutting or burnishing.

I look forward to your posting more of your findings, when you feel able and willing. I think several of the other regulars expressed interest in the 'why it works' of honing and sharpening, as well as the 'how to do it'.


----------



## awkwood (5 Jun 2014)

I bought a DMT 4000 grit plate 
It is good for honing an edge for normal use. The edge would need a strop to produce a mirror polish, but that isn't required for a lot of my work


----------



## JustBen (5 Jun 2014)

Paul Chapman":w71k0xdt said:


> JustBen":w71k0xdt said:
> 
> 
> > Didn't Paul Sellers do a video showing that honing/sharpening above 1000g or so makes very little difference to how a blade cuts?
> ...



I though I would try it.

Just sharpened 2 irons to 300 and 1000 (that's all I've got on my diamond stone)
Planed up some oak, walnut and beech inc end grain and can honestly say I felt very little difference.
Both cut well.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (5 Jun 2014)

JustBen":1iik1vz8 said:


> Didn't Paul Sellers do a video showing that honing/sharpening above 1000g or so makes very little difference to how a blade cuts?
> 
> Will see if I can find the link.
> 
> ...



I'm afraid I'm going to add to the head-shaking and tooth-sucking.

Sharpening to 'fine India' is OK for jack-plane and try-plane work in dimensioning stock, but for finish smoothing and final fitting, something better is needed. I'd agree with him that going to 25,000 grit is over-egging it, but something like a Welsh slate (about 8000 grit), black Arkansas or at the very least stropping with a fine abrasive such as Chromium oxide is what you need to smooth wood consistently to a decent standard, unless you are prepared to spend a long time with cabinet scrapers and progressively finer abrasive papers.

I may have misheard, but at one point he said that his 15,000 grit planed surface was 'too smooth', and he'd have to roughen it up a bit to get a finish to adhere. He is entitled to his opinion and his way of working, of course, but I'm afraid I just don't agree with this at all. The better the finish from the plane, the better the lustre in the final finish, generally.


----------



## Paul Chapman (5 Jun 2014)

JustBen":374xtzxc said:


> I though I would try it.
> 
> Just sharpened 2 irons to 300 and 1000 (that's all I've got on my diamond stone)
> Planed up some oak, walnut and beech inc end grain and can honestly say I felt very little difference.
> Both cut well.



The problem with any debate about how sharp a blade needs to be is that every piece of wood is different. I don't doubt that you were able to plane your oak, walnut and beech with a blade honed to 300 grit. The problem arises when other pieces of the same wood prove more demanding. It pays to be able to hone your blades to 'super sharp' for when you come across the more demanding pieces - although I hone mine to 'super sharp' all the time as it's so little extra effort.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Phil Pascoe (5 Jun 2014)

If it's blunt, it's blunt. If it's sharp enough, it's sharp enough. You just need the experience and knowledge to know what sharp enough is. There's no point worrying beyond that - life's too short.


----------



## G S Haydon (5 Jun 2014)

phil.p":3izgyzdx said:


> If it's blunt, it's blunt. If it's sharp enough, it's sharp enough. You just need the experience and knowledge to know what sharp enough is. There's no point worrying beyond that - life's too short.



Fact  

"You just need the experience and knowledge to know what sharp enough is" + for the task at hand. 8)


----------



## woodbrains (5 Jun 2014)

JustBen":1llelq1w said:


> ????
> He just demonstrated that it works fine.
> 
> And even if there was a difference, if an old man can't feel the difference (someone who is more likely feel it with ageing bones and muscles), is the extra time/cost worth worrying about?



Hello,

Paul Daniels' Bunco Booth springs to mind; he demonstrated that bashing a wristwatch with a hammer had no ill effect on the watch, or the Queen was never where it was last hidden!

Seriously, if the only effect a sharp tool has is one that is marginally easier to push, then you are looking in the wrong place.

Mike.


----------



## CStanford (5 Jun 2014)

By far your easiest and less costly introduction to the whole .x-micron superfine media love-fest will be high grit sandpapers or lapping films on glass.


----------



## JustBen (5 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":2bxw5me0 said:


> JustBen":2bxw5me0 said:
> 
> 
> > ????
> ...



Ok then.


----------



## edsof754 (6 Jun 2014)

I think Mr sellers is just proving a point as someone who is not dependant on the sponsorship of plane makers etc


----------



## Corneel (6 Jun 2014)

Wait a second. I agree that the test from mr Sellers was flawed. He only tested on easy pine. But JustBen just reports how he got similar results on oak and beech including ENDGRAIN! That's a pretty tough test. This merrits further investigation. Especally because an India stone was the standard for a long time and an Black arkansas was ment for surgical instruments.


----------



## Bluekingfisher (6 Jun 2014)

CStanford":3t1lmf66 said:


> By far your easiest and less costly introduction to the whole .x-micron superfine media love-fest will be high grit sandpapers or lapping films on glass.



This is obviously a more involved operation than I had anticipated. Perhaps a lot of it is a labour of love and a fascination of sharpening method.

I think until I am a tad more experienced in this art the simplest method may actually just be very fine W&D paper. Seems I need to pop into Halfords for a box of W&D.

Fascinating reading though.

David


----------



## Phil Pascoe (6 Jun 2014)

Go to a motor factor or steel merchants for your wet and dry - you'll probably get better quality paper for less money.


----------



## MIGNAL (6 Jun 2014)

Ultimately though Wet and Dry proves to be a little more costly. Oil stones last a lifetime or two. Even my 8,000 G waterstone is 15 years and probably has another 10 if I take it right down to the last 5 mm's. Not sure how long a Diamond plate lasts. My cheap one is only a few months old.
As for sharpening. You will get good results finishing with a medium stone. Good, good enough but not spectacular. It's probably good enough for 90% + of the work needed. But I also work some difficult woods. Some joints have to be supremely precise, such that I'm almost taking a mere scraping when paring with a chisel. You can only really do that with fiendishly sharp tools. To put it another way, I hone a scalpel that is fresh out of the packet.


----------



## bugbear (6 Jun 2014)

MIGNAL":2mk70w2p said:


> Ultimately though Wet and Dry proves to be a little more costly. Oil stones last a lifetime or two. Even my 8,000 G waterstone is 15 years and probably has another 10 if I take it right down to the last 5 mm's. Not sure how long a Diamond plate lasts. My cheap one is only a few months old.
> As for sharpening. You will get good results finishing with a medium stone. Good, good enough but not spectacular. It's probably good enough for 90% + of the work needed. But I also work some difficult woods. Some joints have to be supremely precise, such that I'm almost taking a mere scraping when paring with a chisel. You can only really do that with fiendishly sharp tools. To put it another way, I hone a scalpel that is fresh out of the packet.



Charles was careful to say that SiC is a good *introduction*...

BugBear


----------



## Bluekingfisher (6 Jun 2014)

phil.p":359j4xk6 said:


> Go to a motor factor or steel merchants for your wet and dry - you'll probably get better quality paper for less money.



Phil - when you say motor factor, can you clarify, do you mean a dealership?


----------



## marcros (6 Jun 2014)

no, motor parts supplier. http://www.yell.com/s/motor+factors-huntingdon.html

or online of course.


----------



## CStanford (6 Jun 2014)

Bluekingfisher":3oijefaw said:


> CStanford":3oijefaw said:
> 
> 
> > By far your easiest and less costly introduction to the whole .x-micron superfine media love-fest will be high grit sandpapers or lapping films on glass.
> ...



Yes, the fine autobody papers, used for rubbing out automotive clear coat, will work extremely well. The last time I was in Autozone (U.S.) I'm fairly sure that I saw 3,000 grit sandpaper. I know they have 2,500 grit and this will put an extraordinary mirror finish on tool steel. 

Here we go, 3M 3,000 grit sandpaper:

http://www.amazon.com/3M-03064-Trizact- ... B005RNGL9O

The assortment pack I used to buy:

http://www.amazon.com/3M-Wetordry-Sandp ... B005JPGTNI


----------



## Bluekingfisher (6 Jun 2014)

Thanks Fellahs, for the relatively low cost of the paper I'll pop in a buy a few sheets to see how it works out.

Many thanks.

David


----------



## marcros (6 Jun 2014)

Bluekingfisher":1oyvoes6 said:


> Thanks Fellahs, for the relatively low cost of the paper I'll pop in a buy a few sheets to see how it works out.
> 
> Many thanks.
> 
> David



One thing to add is to buy branded sandpaper, or buy a few sheets of the cheap to try out before buying in bulk. The super cheap stuff IME isnt worth bothering with.


----------



## JustBen (6 Jun 2014)

I bought some Klingspor paper a while back. It's pretty good stuff and only pence per sheet.

http://www.thepolishingshop.co.uk/acata ... discs.html


----------



## rafezetter (6 Jun 2014)

CStanford":1p71fak0 said:


> By far your easiest and less costly introduction to the whole .x-micron superfine media love-fest will be high grit sandpapers or lapping films on glass.



@CStanford - I'll see your 3m 3000 paper and raise you; GLAR 5000  

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/370964116399?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

I've found various assorted 2000 - 5000 packs as above excellent wet n dry papers and for just a few quid getting about 5 strips from each one to use, I consider that bargain value hard to beat for an occasional hand planer like myself to get crazy sharp for less than beer money. As I've said elsewhere I do a final hone polish on heavyweight printer paper which gives me an ultra mirror shine, similar to the using cardboard on a strop technique.

They cut progressively slower with use than lapping films, as films wear away like a stone revealing fresh abrasive media instead of wearing down a fixed one, but you'll only be doing a few passes on the ones 2k > 5k anyway so they are a good cheap alternative and I've found make things much easier even if it is technically going well over a "working sharp" benchmark. (but definitely helps when hitting pine knots.) *glide*.

The plus side to going finer than 1k is that you'll wear your plane blade slower too as these high grits for touch ups barely remove any metal at all, making your micro bevel last that much longer before having to regrind a primary, making that purchase of a fancy, but moderately expensive, "new forged 01" / "old vintage good steel" blade that much more sensible.

(blimey lol I actually sound like I know what I'm espousing - all that's thanks to you guys.. go me  )


----------



## fluffflinger (6 Jun 2014)

I started with wet and dry from an Motor Factors and had more than acceptable results wworking down to 1500 grit on an old granite tile. 

Like many of us I have used all sorts of sharpening methods and am still experimenting/messy about (because it's fun, not because I am fanatical). 

Best results by far are lapping film on glass, I have no idea what grit 0.5micron lapping film equates to but all I know is I can get an amazingly good edge with this stuff and it's a few stokes to renew the edge. Autosol on MDF also get's my vote.


----------



## J_SAMa (7 Jun 2014)

David C":32rjdqfc said:


> The fine side of Paul's old Norton stone was 400 grit. Why does he now sharpen with 3 diamond stones and a strop?
> 
> David Charlesworth



I made a point in another thread that the Fine India may actually be a lot finer than 400 grits. I think the stone gets clogged and that somehow makes it finer... Still have to test this theory by declogging the stone with white spirit and using it.
woodworker-1950-t80381-60.html
^Half mirror shine... The cutting speed is a little slower than a 1000 grit waterstone. After the Fine India, few dozen strokes on the strop with green compound and the tip becomes fully mirror polished (not the whole bevel, just the first couple of mm).



David C":32rjdqfc said:


> I started with the dreaded fine/coarse India stone. Arkansas stones were significantly better and When Japanese waterstones arrived here they were a revalation, being significantly better again.
> 
> David Charlesworth



Well, it's probably just me and my stones but whenever I try to flatten a chisel back on my 1000 or 3000 grit Cerax the stone becomes "sticky" and it's difficult to move the blade along it. I like diamond stones and oilstones for their better "feel". Also not having to worry about moisture causing rust on a blade is a bonus.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (7 Jun 2014)

You try to flatten a chisel on 1000 grit? Surely it should be flat long before that?


----------



## bugbear (7 Jun 2014)

J_SAMa":ah557bsh said:


> I made a point in another thread that the Fine India may actually be a lot finer than 400 grits. I think the stone gets clogged and that somehow makes it finer... Still have to test this theory by declogging the stone with white spirit and using it.



Just to clarify (and be a pedant) it's not _finer_ than 400 - it's _slower_ than 400. Clogging or loading
(obviously..) could not change the actual particle size.

This demonstrates once again that while grit size is the most important
factor for an abrasive, it's a long way from being the only factor.

BugBear


----------



## J_SAMa (7 Jun 2014)

phil.p":369fskbx said:


> You try to flatten a chisel on 1000 grit? Surely it should be flat long before that?


I take backs of new chisels from 250 grit all the way up to mirror polish (or at least no visible scratches), going through each and every grit to remove the scratch marks from the last one (I guess I shouldn't call this process "flattening"). Used to do it on waterstones until I discovered India. It would get quite irritating with narrow firmer or mortise chisels as they tended to roll and the stickiness of the waterstones didn't help. Up until recently I had been in the process of slowly acquiring the tools I need so had to do that a lot.
----------------------------------------------
Bugbear,
Yes I realize it's physically impossible to change the grit size. But the surface I get from a clogged stone is much finer so... Well anyway, it works and I'm happy


----------



## CStanford (7 Jun 2014)

rafezetter":152qn0am said:


> CStanford":152qn0am said:
> 
> 
> > By far your easiest and less costly introduction to the whole .x-micron superfine media love-fest will be high grit sandpapers or lapping films on glass.
> ...



We can always move to optical polishing compounds (you see, this stuff never ends really):

http://www.harricksci.com/ftir/accessor ... ishing-Kit

Then there is 'Monkey Jam' Pinewood Derby axle polish with a particle grit size of LESS THAN .05 microns (.05!):

http://www.derbymonkeygarage.com/axle-t ... Ogod30YArg

Note that green compound is around .5 micron, not .05 as is the Monkey Jam. See: http://www.japanwoodworker.com/Product/ ... OgodeRoA3A

And then there are the lapidary polishes too fine and numerous to mention.

I mean, why not? If we should move from a Black Arky to a waterstone then why stop at a waterstone? And I'm sure there are other industrial and aerospace polishes even finer than those above. It becomes arbitrary, almost, one's stopping point. The edges got sharp at the India/Black Ark/Strop stage, at some point it's just a psychological exercise of feeling as if one isn't leaving one mote on the table. An obsession. And a ridiculous one at that.


----------



## J_SAMa (7 Jun 2014)

CStanford":6ugr4v7x said:


> rafezetter":6ugr4v7x said:
> 
> 
> > CStanford":6ugr4v7x said:
> ...



I think someone needs to do a SCIENTIFIC experiment on the properties of edges polished to different grits... Or has that already been done?
And what are those 0.05 micron grits made of anyway?


----------



## CStanford (7 Jun 2014)

Scientific? Who needs scientific? Somebody comes out with the next X-finer stone, labels it "Japanese," and the things fly off dealers' shelves. The only thing these units have in common with REAL Japanese stones (the ones that come out of the ground in Japan) is that the recommended lubricant, if you will, is water. Thank God nobody came out with fake Arkansas stones. When somebody mentions these they are talking about the rocks that come from Arkansas. What refreshing and straightforward nomenclature. 

At least the Monkey Jam people thought of a different name.


----------



## lurcher (7 Jun 2014)

try it on your finger nail if it digs in its sharp any more than 1/200 and it time and metal wasted alot of you go on and on sharpen to 1/200 when dull repeat simples 
we didnt have all this tosh 50 yr ago and it no needed today to finnish a piece of wood to take a finnish then 4oo is overkill
go look at some of our fine buildings and see what was acheived with alot less than we have today
the finer you sharpen the less your tools can work they can become to pollished to form a cutting edge simlar to a knife edge
we dont need surgery sharp just very sharp will do and kept that way and away from young fingers


----------



## iNewbie (7 Jun 2014)

lurcher":gwq2p384 said:


> the finer you sharpen the less your tools can work they can become to pollished to form a cutting edge simlar to a knife edge
> we dont need surgery sharp just very sharp will do and kept that way and away from young fingers



Knife edges can be very sharp - in fact surgery requires them so... 

The sharper the better imho.


----------



## Bluekingfisher (7 Jun 2014)

I bought, a couple of 4 packs of 2000 grit w&d today from Halfords at £3.99 a pack. I tried a couple of motor factors outlets as suggested but they only stocked to 1200 gt.

I didn't get a chance to try it as SWMBO had me painting the banisters today, maybe tomorrow I 'll get the chance.


----------



## Corneel (8 Jun 2014)

CStanford":2cs7fb6e said:


> Scientific? Who needs scientific? Somebody comes out with the next X-finer stone, labels it "Japanese," and the things fly off dealers' shelves. The only thing these units have in common with REAL Japanese stones (the ones that come out of the ground in Japan) is that the recommended lubricant, if you will, is water. Thank God nobody came out with fake Arkansas stones. When somebody mentions these they are talking about the rocks that come from Arkansas. What refreshing and straightforward nomenclature.
> 
> At least the Monkey Jam people thought of a different name.



Well, most of these are made in Japan, so why wouldn't we call them Japanese?

I wonder about that Monkey jam axle polish stuff. The site lookes like one of the typical snake oil suppliers.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (8 Jun 2014)

It does look ...well... American!


----------



## CStanford (8 Jun 2014)

Let's see Corneel, I can rent virtual office space in Arkansas, manufacture a 'stone' and recommend the use of oil to float the swarf and, voila', I'm selling "Arkansas" stones. 

Being manufactured "in Japan" is no marker of any particular quality, per se. There is no mystique or cultural know-how involved in any way whatsoever. All of the manufactured stones use one of a small range of fine abrasives. They can be combined with a binder and formed in to a brick, adhered to a sheet of paper, film, or thin layer of ceramic or metal, or simply provided loose in vials or other bulk packaging. 

Otherwise, people appear to get pretty serious about Pinewood Derby racing. Here's a polishing kit that goes all the way through *8,000 grit 3M paper *with the Monkey Jam as the last step. They list the Monkey Jam as 600,000 grit, but one must take that with a grain of salt I suppose since it's "American." What would less than .05 micron be on an equivalency scale? 

https://www.derbymonkeygarage.com/axle- ... shing-kit/

I assume that there aren't any quibbles with the veracity of 3M *8,000 grit paper.*

Here's a 60,000 grit diamond stick:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/181367075941?lpid=82

More 60,000 grit paste:
http://www.aussiesapphire.com.au/index. ... cts_id=232

This lapidary supplier can provide 100,000 grit polish:
http://www.gravescompany.com/polishin.htm

Here's .05 micron polishing powder from an industrial supplier (sold by the pound):
http://www.extec.com/grinding-polishing ... na-powder/

I believe that this is 500,000 grit on the American scale. The math sort of makes sense.

Monkey Jam not so unbelievable at this point.


----------



## swb58 (8 Jun 2014)

lurcher":ycjl7rxy said:


> try it on your finger nail if it digs in its sharp any more than 1/200 and it time and metal wasted alot of you go on and on sharpen to 1/200 when dull repeat simples
> we didnt have all this tosh 50 yr ago and it no needed today to finnish a piece of wood to take a finnish then 4oo is overkill
> go look at some of our fine buildings and see what was acheived with alot less than we have today
> the finer you sharpen the less your tools can work they can become to pollished to form a cutting edge simlar to a knife edge
> we dont need surgery sharp just very sharp will do and kept that way and away from young fingers



Well said Sir.
I can't help thinking that the need for finer and finer grits and pastes measured in microns is the result of marketing that leads us to believe they are a necessity. My great grandmothers brother was a cabinet maker, I would love to know what he'd say on the subject. 

I also get your point about a knife edge. I just sharpened mine on a coarse carborundum stone and it cuts paper perfectly , sometimes you're better off having an edge with a bit of bite.


----------



## JohnPW (8 Jun 2014)

I've recently started to polish/strop with Autosol on a piece of card, and have found that it does made it sharper.

So for final honing, I would go for that.

I don't think knife sharpening is all that relevant because the finish left on the material being cut doesn't matter, at least not with kitchen knives. As long as a knife can slice eg a tomato, it's sharp enough.


----------



## MIGNAL (8 Jun 2014)

Finest edge I've come across was a blade sharpened on the thigh of a Cuban virgin. 
No idea what Grit that is but I was smiling for a whole week.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (8 Jun 2014)

MIGNAL":owzmwgpm said:


> Finest edge I've come across was a blade sharpened on the thigh of a Cuban virgin.
> No idea what Grit that is but I was smiling for a whole week.



I'll bet she wasn't, with Autosol paste smeared all over her thighs.....


----------



## Phil Pascoe (8 Jun 2014)

No, she wasn't using Autosol. She was just using his spit.


----------



## bugbear (8 Jun 2014)

JohnPW":89oaches said:


> I don't think knife sharpening is all that relevant because the finish left on the material being cut doesn't matter, at least not with kitchen knives.



At the risk of being off topic, I disagree. With fruit and veg there is a clear difference in texture, that affects the mouth feel. If texture didnt' matter, there's only
be one shape of pasta!

BugBear


----------



## GLFaria (8 Jun 2014)

When it comes to abrasives and sharpening media, people seem to be getting out of touch with reality.

Just take a hard look at the work of 17th, 18th, 19th century artisans - be they joiners, gunsmiths, clock makers, whatever. 

It is very obvious these people could never achieve to do any good woork - barely average - with the poor materials and equipment available at the time, isn't it? Fortunately they didn't know it and left us all those works of art for us to wonder at...


----------



## Cheshirechappie (8 Jun 2014)

GLFaria":2iyqe0zp said:


> When it comes to abrasives and sharpening media, people seem to be getting out of touch with reality.
> 
> Just take a hard look at the work of 17th, 18th, 19th century artisans - be they joiners, gunsmiths, clock makers, whatever.
> 
> It is very obvious these people could never achieve to do any good woork - barely average - with the poor materials and equipment available at the time, isn't it? Fortunately they didn't know it and left us all those works of art for us to wonder at...



It seems to be a part of human nature - mine's bigger than yours, I'm richer than you, my car is faster than your car, my polished finish is shinier than your polished finish....

Most of us don't really care much and just get on with life, but there's always someone who's driven to be one better than everyone else. Sometimes, that's a good thing, and in the end we all benefit from the innovation, but sometimes it can get a bit silly.

It's still better than there never being any innovation, though. Like using the thighs of Cuban virgins for sharpening - now THAT'S innovation! - but will we all benefit, or will it turn out to be silly? Only time will tell...


----------



## bugbear (8 Jun 2014)

GLFaria":2xm0v20t said:


> When it comes to abrasives and sharpening media, people seem to be getting out of touch with reality.
> 
> Just take a hard look at the work of 17th, 18th, 19th century artisans - be they joiners, gunsmiths, clock makers, whatever.
> 
> It is very obvious these people could never achieve to do any good woork - barely average - with the poor materials and equipment available at the time, isn't it? Fortunately they didn't know it and left us all those works of art for us to wonder at...



Charles and I discussed that (quite a bit  ) in another thread.

BugBear


----------



## Corneel (8 Jun 2014)

CStanford":ai7cmgqv said:


> Let's see Corneel, I can rent virtual office space in Arkansas, manufacture a 'stone' and recommend the use of oil to float the swarf and, voila', I'm selling "Arkansas" stones.




When a Japanese company invents a new type of waterstone, I don't see anything wrong with calling it a Japanese waterstone.

But I see your point too. It's a bit like Gouda cheese. The rubbery tasteless stuff manufactured all over the world is now called Gouda cheese, while the real deal, made on the farms around Gouda in Holland is called "Goudse boerenkaas" (Gouda farmers cheese). They had to enter the "boeren" (farmers) into the name to distinguish it from the non descript factory stuff.


----------



## CStanford (8 Jun 2014)

Norton ought to start calling their wet-or-dry autobody sandpaper "Japanese Sandpaper" to give it an air of more quality. They could run commercials with a Japanese octogenarian rubbing out clearcoat on a restored vintage Toyota.

They're all the same abrasives, just presented in a different way.


----------



## woodbrains (8 Jun 2014)

GLFaria":3fvvhxqp said:


> When it comes to abrasives and sharpening media, people seem to be getting out of touch with reality.
> 
> Just take a hard look at the work of 17th, 18th, 19th century artisans - be they joiners, gunsmiths, clock makers, whatever.
> 
> It is very obvious these people could never achieve to do any good woork - barely average - with the poor materials and equipment available at the time, isn't it? Fortunately they didn't know it and left us all those works of art for us to wonder at...



Hello,

We often have the contention that workers of old did fabulous work with lesser tools than we have today, and I'm afraid it is bunkham. The tools they had were often the best that were available, as toolmakers exhibited the same pride and skil as the artisans who used the tools. Steel was as good as it could be made, where as steel is made as good as it can be to a price, so old steel is often at least as good as we have nowadays and arguably sometimes better. The tools they had were better than most of the tools offered to the DIY market and even many of the tools offered to the Trade. I would prefer to have any old tool, woodie, infil, whatever than something made by Stanley of Irwin etc. of the last 30 years. Thankfully some tool makers are giving us tools that are _back_ to the standards of tool these old makers had. And at prices in real terms that are no more expensive in real terms as the old craftsmen would have had to pay.

Some of the reasons that their work was so good, aside from their skill, was time, they spent a lot more man hours on what they made, because things were not done to such price cutting as we now have to endure and also people worked long hours with poor pay and conditions. There are many reasons,work of those times were good, but it wasn't done with poor tools by any stretch. Nor ones which were not sharpened with the best media available, slate, carborundum, novaculite, etc. whatever could be quarried locally. All these things are good now and if they are obtainable, are still used. We live in a modern age though, so if we make alternatives that are more convenient, or surpass what has gone before, why should we not use them. After all, we do not have the fabulously tractable old growth Cuban Mahogany that was abundant then either. We have to make stuff from far less easy stuff.

Mike.


----------



## CStanford (8 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":1hhk2pnz said:


> GLFaria":1hhk2pnz said:
> 
> 
> > When it comes to abrasives and sharpening media, people seem to be getting out of touch with reality.
> ...



You ought to read this if you think they 'spent more man hours on what they made:'

http://www.wpatrickedwards.com/particle.htm

Patrick Edwards' Home Page:

http://www.wpatrickedwards.com/


----------



## woodbrains (8 Jun 2014)

Hello,

I'm not saying they were not quick or did not work intensely, but the fact is a pice of furniture would have been made by many hands in a production line type affair. There were lots of man hours, because there were lots of men contributing to the whole. It matters not. They still used good sharp tools, the notion that they did great work with lesser tools is false.

Regarding the naming of things, we have to call a thing something to communicate what we mean. Japanese stones is a fairly universal name for what we all know them to be. Authenticity is irrelevant; after all, Warrington hammers, Lancashire pattern pincers or Lonon pattern chisels were often not made any where near where the name suggests. In fact have you ever made London pattern dovetails?

Mike.


----------



## Shrubby (8 Jun 2014)

To add to the discussion on sharpening methods of days gone - I've inherited sharpening kit and in both instances there was a double sided oilstone you would expect and another much finer stone in a fitted wooden box carefully wrapped in cloth like some ancient treasure. One a Celebrated German Razor Hone and the second a very hard mottled green stone which is nice to finish curved tools on. Both of the finer stones showed lots of signs of use .Sadly the original owners weren't around to tell the tales that go with the tools
Matt


----------



## GLFaria (8 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":1r4bexrq said:


> GLFaria":1r4bexrq said:
> 
> 
> > When it comes to abrasives and sharpening media, people seem to be getting out of touch with reality.
> ...



That's not my point. I am not talking of time or price. My point is, basically, that there is no need to go to certain extremities in the hope of getting a good work done for it. Past the basics - and I am in no doubt that "basics" has a totally different meaning if you are a professional or just an amateur - what counts is the workman's knowledge and ability.
Ever looked carefully at a fine hunting rifle of the 18th century? The quality of the surfaces, the staightness of the lines and arrises, the finish?


----------



## woodbrains (8 Jun 2014)

Hello,

No; time, effort, motivation etc. etc. are just some of the other factors that added to the reasons good work was done in days of old. Which was part of the reason why they had good tools ( the best that were around) and well looked after and sharpened. All the stars were in alignment. Any one that would have been lacking and they would not have produced the fine work they did.

The fineness of the work, be it an old shotgun, or whatever only reinforces that the tools were great and the sharpening was equal to it. Abrasive paper is only relatively recent introduction. They did have some abrasives available, but they were not as reliant on it as modern woodworkers. The fine edges came more or less, straight from the tool. This cannot be done unless the tools were razor sharp and working well.

I have met many excellent craftsmen and many are capable of doing work equal or surpassing what has gone. The reasons it often is not done, is not lack of skill, or over fussing with tools, but economics, pure and simple.

Mike.


----------



## bugbear (8 Jun 2014)

Shrubby":396kban2 said:


> To add to the discussion on sharpening methods of days gone - I've inherited sharpening kit and in both instances there was a double sided oilstone you would expect and another much finer stone in a fitted wooden box carefully wrapped in cloth like some ancient treasure. One a Celebrated German Razor Hone and the second a very hard mottled green stone which is nice to finish curved tools on. Both of the finer stones showed lots of signs of use .Sadly the original owners weren't around to tell the tales that go with the tools
> Matt



Thre latter is the fanous Charnley Forest, They give a very fine finish, but hell, they're slow.

But considered worth the time in the old days.

BugBear


----------



## CStanford (8 Jun 2014)

woodbrains":4eqfls3o said:


> Hello,
> 
> I'm not saying they were not quick or did not work intensely, but the fact is a pice of furniture would have been made by many hands in a production line type affair. There were lots of man hours, because there were lots of men contributing to the whole. It matters not. They still used good sharp tools, the notion that they did great work with lesser tools is false.
> 
> ...



In the main I agree Mike. "Japanese" has become a generic term for waterstones. Yes, I have made very skinny dovetails. But London Pattern does communicate the concept in only a few words.

As for the woodworkers of yore, whatever they may have found lacking in their overall toolkit they found a way to overcome it:

http://www.ronaldphillipsantiques.com/D ... oryID=1336

If this is the kind of work that can be accomplished with lousy honing media, bad steel, and the resulting dull edge tools then I need some of each. Don't you?


----------



## Bluekingfisher (9 Jun 2014)

I finally got around to using the 2000 grit W&D paper. I have to say, I wasn't able to see or detect any noticeable difference in the final polish of the honed edge or a difference in the quality of the cut over the 1200 grit variert.??

The 1200 grit paper I am using is the stuff from Tool Station at £2.60 for a pack of ten 280mm x 230mm sheets. I use it dry and it doesn't tear, unless of course you go at it like a bull in a china shop. There may of course be a difference of the grits from the various brands. However, for the difference in price i will stick with the Tool Station stuff

i also found that using the Silverline polishing compound (0n a leather strop) gave a better polished surface on its own as opposed to using a drizzle of oil, which I assume it purely to create a little lubrication and prevent the blade sticking?

David


----------



## bugbear (9 Jun 2014)

CStanford":11vhn0sl said:


> http://www.ronaldphillipsantiques.com/D ... oryID=1336
> 
> If this is the kind of work that can be accomplished with lousy honing media, bad steel, and the resulting dull edge tools then I need some of each. Don't you?



You are Phil Connors, and I claim my five pounds

post877708.html?hilit=hindered#p877708

BugBear


----------



## Phil Pascoe (9 Jun 2014)

Who's Phil Connors?


----------



## J_SAMa (9 Jun 2014)

Bluekingfisher":2r2e3ni9 said:


> I finally got around to using the 2000 grit W&D paper. I have to say, I wasn't able to see or detect any noticeable difference in the final polish of the honed edge or a difference in the quality of the cut over the 1200 grit variert.??



Above 1200, the scratches are basically invisible... Not noticing the difference in quality of cut may be due to the way you sharpen, e.g. if you removed the burr properly



Bluekingfisher":2r2e3ni9 said:


> i also found that using the Silverline polishing compound (0n a leather strop) gave a better polished surface on its own as opposed to using a drizzle of oil, which I assume it purely to create a little lubrication and prevent the blade sticking?



That might have been because the blade wasn't wiped down properly, and the residual oil/compound mixture made the surface appear matte... Are you using a thick oil? I only ever pour some baby oil (same as what I use on oilstones) over a FRESH strop, before I even apply the compound. The oil will soak into the leather and as I press the blade onto it during any subsequent uses it will seep back up a little, lubricating the strop. For obvious reasons, don't use BLO or any finishing oil that will dry up. Some compounds are very "waxy" and may not even need additional lubrication. The leather I have is chamois, the type used for cars. It's thin and can get "compressed" a little during use, resulting in a very little "give".

But use whatever substrate with whatever lubrication you want, you will always end up with a very sharp edge. The green compound is wonderful stuff.

Sam


----------



## bugbear (9 Jun 2014)

CStanford":1gbbvkhf said:


> I mean, why not? If we should move from a Black Arky to a waterstone then why stop at a waterstone? And I'm sure there are other industrial and aerospace polishes even finer than those above. It becomes arbitrary, almost, one's stopping point.



Indeed. Especially when using a jig, it's really easy to proceed though a sequence of ever finer grits, 5-10 strokes each. One may or may not detect much difference much of the time, but "why not" (since it's easy) is indeed a driving motivation. Since the wear
on the fine abrasives is very low, even expensive and/or delicate ones have a long life (and hence low cost-per-use)

BugBear


----------



## Bluekingfisher (9 Jun 2014)

J_SAMa":36un357f said:


> Bluekingfisher":36un357f said:
> 
> 
> > I finally got around to using the 2000 grit W&D paper. I have to say, I wasn't able to see or detect any noticeable difference in the final polish of the honed edge or a difference in the quality of the cut over the 1200 grit variert.??
> ...



Hi Sam,

Firstly, I use a strop of leather, approx 2mm thick (originally the interior pocket of a satchel) glued to a piece of MDF. I just charge the leather with the green compound and with the blade still in the Veritas honing jig, draw it toward me 15-20 times. 

This has given excellent results on its own. I then remove the iron from the jig, place it on the strop and draw it towards me once, check it to ensure the wire has been removed. I it again if required. i also use the heel of my hand as a strop, giving it a couple of light strokes. This is enough to shave the hair on my arm which I assume is sharp enough?

As mentioned, stepping up to 2000 didn't show any difference. My eyes are starting to fail admittedly but i wasn't able to see scratch marks on the beveled edge at 1200 grit.

BTW - I hone the primary bevel at 25 degrees and the micro bevel at 30. Does it need to be honed at a steeper angle.

I used light 3 in 1 oil on the experiment, you are right, it produced a matt glaze to the blade although that was easily cleaned off with a soft rag.

David


----------



## Cheshirechappie (9 Jun 2014)

David - it sounds to me like you're getting pretty close to cracking sharpening. If you can get an arm-hair shaving edge without much bother, you really don't need to go any further. For some applications - rough planing, heavy chopping with chisels - that's arguably sharper than you need; you could stop one stage further back in the sharpening regime; as long as you remove the wire edge, it'll do.

Primary bevel at 25 degrees and secondary (or micro, or whatever anybody else calls it) at 30 degrees is good for about 95% of applications. Some blades (those of A2 steel sometimes, but not always) like a slightly higher 'secondary' angle, as do tools for heavy chopping, such as mortice chisels used in hardwoods. A few tools, such as carving chisels for use on softer woods and very fine paring chisels, can go to lower angles (grind at 20 degrees, hone at 22 or so degrees, for example), but these are exceptions, not the general rule. Experience will tell you what a particular plane iron or chisel will like for a particular duty, but 25/30 degrees is almost always a good starting point.

There's no reason at all why people shouldn't experiment a bit with sharpening to see what works for them, especially in the 'improver' stages of woodworking. Most experienced workers, though, gravitate to a fairly simple and quick system, with three stages being quite common - 1) grind for bulk removal of metal to repair damaged or 'honed out' edges, 2) honing on something like a fine India, or medium to fine diamond or water stone for workaday edges, and 3) a fine polishing stone or other fine media for when the ultimate edge is needed. The strop can be used after honing to remove the wire edge, though the edge from some polishing stones (Welsh slate, translucent Arkansas, fine waterstones) is good enough to need no stropping.

There are, of course, umpteen variations on this three-step approach, and once you've found one that works for you, stick with it. It can take a bit of practice to develop a consistent technique that gives you good working edges without much thinking about it, but that applies to almost anything in life!


----------



## Bluekingfisher (9 Jun 2014)

Cheshirechappie":36s1hpp2 said:


> David - it sounds to me like you're getting pretty close to cracking sharpening. If you can get an arm-hair shaving edge without much bother, you really don't need to go any further. For some applications - rough planing, heavy chopping with chisels - that's arguably sharper than you need; you could stop one stage further back in the sharpening regime; as long as you remove the wire edge, it'll do.
> 
> Primary bevel at 25 degrees and secondary (or micro, or whatever anybody else calls it) at 30 degrees is good for about 95% of applications. Some blades (those of A2 steel sometimes, but not always) like a slightly higher 'secondary' angle, as do tools for heavy chopping, such as mortice chisels used in hardwoods. A few tools, such as carving chisels for use on softer woods and very fine paring chisels, can go to lower angles (grind at 20 degrees, hone at 22 or so degrees, for example), but these are exceptions, not the general rule. Experience will tell you what a particular plane iron or chisel will like for a particular duty, but 25/30 degrees is almost always a good starting point.
> 
> ...



Thanks CC for the reassurance, it appears I am at least heading in the right direction - I have always tried to keep my cutting tools as sharp as possible, although from what i have picked up from the forum members over the past few days, only to a level you describe as "workaday" sharpness, which has generally been fine The obstruction in my sharpening advancement was probably my exposure to the many variables involved in sharpening. Being an individual of simple needs I was looking for a way to glean sharp edges by the simplest method, nothing worse than faffing around in the middle of a job with various equipment needing to be dragged out.

Anyway, i think I have a preferred method now, thanks again to all those who contributed. It has been much appreciated.

David


----------



## CStanford (9 Jun 2014)

bugbear":1sxl4fot said:


> CStanford":1sxl4fot said:
> 
> 
> > I mean, why not? If we should move from a Black Arky to a waterstone then why stop at a waterstone? And I'm sure there are other industrial and aerospace polishes even finer than those above. It becomes arbitrary, almost, one's stopping point.
> ...



The "why not" was *sort of* tongue in cheek. There are finer abrasives out there and nobody *appears* to be using them. Everybody has picked a stopping point somewhere short of the state of the art in polishing.


----------



## woodbrains (9 Jun 2014)

CStanford":3v688yf6 said:


> In the main I agree Mike. "Japanese" has become a generic term for waterstones. Yes, I have made very skinny dovetails. But London Pattern does communicate the concept in only a few words.
> 
> As for the woodworkers of yore, whatever they may have found lacking in their overall toolkit they found a way to overcome it:
> 
> ...



Hello,
This work is, of course, fabulous, you'll get no argument from me there. We do not have to imagine disadvantages for the craftsmen who made them, though, the pieces are remarkable enough, to have been made by men. We all know wood and it could not be cut cleanly and precicely with dull tools then as now. It is unnecessary to pretend that all this fabulous craftsmanship was done with poor tools, and bad sharpening practice. Do we really think that the people who were skilful enough to produce these things lacked the basic skill of sharpening? Modern workshops, that make bespoke things, are not a lot different than we would see back in those days. Ok, there will be electric things like routers, that could have only been imagined then, but the hand tool kits and benches would have been very similar. Less moulding planes, sure, but economics dictates that some things cannot be done that way now. Less people have to be employed to do the work, so electricity makes up for bodies, though not skill. The one thing that would be worse in those days and which little could have been done to rectify, was LIGHT. I'm sure their tools were great, their skill, the steel, but how did they work in the dim workshop interiors and produce this amazing stuff? =D> =D> =D> 

Mike.


----------



## CStanford (9 Jun 2014)

It actually almost looks implausible and impossible the longer one looks at it. Yet there it is in its unequaled glory. Whatever impediments existed had to be rather minor if the output has the ultimate say in the matter.

The ability to hone to dermatone status was pretty far down the list of required skills I would imagine. Sharp, yes. Way out I'm a honing wonk sort of sharpness, no.

Regarding light: Surely, the better shops had lots of windows.


----------



## Alder (11 Jun 2014)

Reading this thread and in particular mention of a much earlier generation of woodworkers reminded me of a common sight at farm sales in Pembrokeshire in the 60s which was that of large grindstone (20 to30 inches diameter) mounted on a stand and rotated by muscle power. In the agricultural context these would have been used to sharpen scythes or hooks and other large cutting tools.
The question therefore is would similar grindstones have been used to sharpen hand tools? 
My late father had a bicycle wheel brazed on the shaft of the grindstone. and an old vacuum cleaner motor mounted on the same frame, the pulley on the motor was so small that the belt driven rotation speed matched that of hand turning.
If the answer to the question on hand tools in the affirmative then had I kept my fathers grindstone then it would not have been necessary for me to attend at Peter Sefton's two day sharpening course which I am booked to do next month.
Russell


----------



## AndyT (11 Jun 2014)

Yes, big wet grindstones were used to sharpen hand tools.
Our school woodwork shop had one, though it did have an electric motor. A constant trickle of water kept everything cool.

Similar grindstones would have been used in Sheffield of course, where all the tools came from!

I suppose there aren't so many Yorkshire masons cutting natural grindstones these days, and they take so much space, so a Tormek becomes a more practical choice.


----------



## bugbear (11 Jun 2014)

AndyT":zihepbve said:


> Yes, big wet grindstones were used to sharpen hand tools.



You mean grind - sharpening comes later.

BugBear


----------



## woodbrains (11 Jun 2014)

bugbear":1zyl9ivs said:


> AndyT":1zyl9ivs said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, big wet grindstones were used to sharpen hand tools.
> ...



Hello,

Unless they were 400 grit, in which case you need nothing else! :twisted: 

Joking aside, I had one once, about 24 in with a rudimentary pillow bearing and a hand crank. My dad replaced its dilapidated stand and we used it from time to time when I was a lad. Don't know what ever happened to it. Afterwards, we always used single bevel sharpening on oilstones. He must have given it away, I suppose.

Mike.


----------



## Jacob (26 Jun 2014)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbAo4Rp ... e=youtu.be

Always refreshing to see Paul Sellers debunking the modern sharpening fashions. He's dead right IMHO. 30 years ago nobody went much further than the Norton 2 sided stone as a rule, except to strop. Wearing (1988) suggests a quick pass over a finer stone if required, and stropping.
Stropping isn't quite the same "honing" - it's purpose is to remove the wire edge and polish the bevel and the face which reduces friction behind the cutting edge.
The main thing with trad sharpening is "little and often", which is where freehand has the advantage. 
Black Arkansas is for razors, scalpels, microtomes etc. - not woodworkers, though Sellers agrees that special work (violin making) might need finer finishing honing. Common sense really.


----------



## bugbear (26 Jun 2014)

Jacob":35ufxvp2 said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbAo4RpM7oM&feature=youtu.be
> 
> Stropping isn't quite the same "honing" - it's purpose is to remove the wire edge and polish the bevel and the face which reduces friction behind the cutting edge.



It's simply a handy way of accessing finer abrasives than many common stones. Discussed with evidence and detail recently.

advice-on-which-leather-for-strop-t76314.html?hilit=stropping

BugBear


----------



## Jacob (26 Jun 2014)

bugbear":1i2ptbjx said:


> Jacob":1i2ptbjx said:
> 
> 
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbAo4RpM7oM&feature=youtu.be
> ...


You can strop with no abrasives - on your hand or on leather with a bit of spit. It polishes and removes the wire edge (if there is any left - it's mostly removed on the stone). It also livens up an edge that has been used. That's the traditional idea and it works. Autosol or similar helps but that's more polish than abrasive, though they merge into one another of course.


----------



## bugbear (26 Jun 2014)

Jacob":1am1klwu said:


> You can strop with no abrasives - on your hand or on leather with a bit of spit.



Well, you can fatigue the wire edge off that way, by repeatedly bending it backwards and forwards, like a bored schoolboy breaking a paperclip. It "works" in that it removes the burr, but it leaves a ragged edge. You might as well do the other trad thing, which is to just hack into a piece of endgrain (birch or beech are commonly used) and just rip the wire edge off in a single motion. It's quicker.

Carver's who wanted a good edge used an abrasive loaded strop, mainly rouge.

BugBear


----------



## CStanford (26 Jun 2014)

Pussyfooting around with the burr might produce a marginally better edge. I guess under magnification it looks like a substantive difference. Magnification has a habit of doing that. Tiny bugs look like horrific monsters. Flies otherworldly. Unmeasurable scratches, the Marianas Trench. Maybe the key is to divest ourselves of our magnifying glasses.

And anyway, one doesn't really need one to admire these 18th/early 19th century beauties (yet again):

http://www.ronaldphillipsantiques.com/D ... oryID=1336

Lots of burls and other figured veneers and figured solid woods. How in the world did they manage to pull it off? Well, because they were able to. And in commercially feasible timeframes it appears as well.

The sharpening wonks and gurus don't seem to have an explanation for it other than to assume that they cried, cursed, and wailed the whole way through. I don't buy it. Not for one second. It's hard to argue with work that went out the door. Acres of it. To a very high standard.


----------



## bugbear (26 Jun 2014)

CStanford":1f0tmwel said:


> Pussyfooting around with the burr might produce a marginally better edge. I guess under magnification it looks like a substantive difference. Magnification has a habit of doing that. Tiny bugs look like horrific monsters. Flies otherworldly. Unmeasurable scratches, the Marianas Trench. Maybe the key is to divest ourselves of our magnifying glasses.
> 
> And anyway, one doesn't really need one to admire these 18th/early 19th century beauties (yet again):
> 
> ...



Your rhetoric is elegant, and your furniture examples are (as ever) lovely.

But I'm afraid to admit, I don't actually see what point you're making. :roll: 

BugBear


----------



## CStanford (26 Jun 2014)

Don't worry. Be happy.

Seems useless to explain it otherwise.

If you own less than a stable of Holteys and polish with less than .05 micron media you've already, in essence, made a choice to do woodwork without the very best. Maybe doing good woodwork doesn't require the absolute very best. Maybe an oilstone and a strop work. They used to, apparently. Did the Earth's magnetic field change and somehow make this no longer so?


----------



## bugbear (26 Jun 2014)

CStanford":7rlkeh8s said:


> Maybe an oilstone and a strop work. They used to, apparently.



And many people have stated, explicitly and clearly that they still do. I'm not sure what statement you're argueing (or at least insinuating) against.

A little less circumlocution might serve well.

BugBear


----------



## CStanford (26 Jun 2014)

Goodness, not hitting on all cylinders today I see.


----------



## Jacob (26 Jun 2014)

CStanford":qasgxsio said:


> .... Maybe an oilstone and a strop work. They used to, apparently. Did the Earth's magnetic field change and somehow make this no longer so?


Something happened about 1990 or a bit later, when sharpening suddenly became very difficult for a lot of people. 
It's very mysterious. Some sort of virus? 
Luckily there are small pockets of survivors who haven't forgotten the old ways!
And yes an oilstone and a strop do work. Pass it on!


----------



## bugbear (26 Jun 2014)

Jacob":3qnqcxbq said:


> And yes an oilstone and a strop do work.



'swot I said. Consensus's all round!  

Especially if you use a decent oil stone or two; india-washita-arkansas oughta' be enough.

BugBear


----------



## CStanford (26 Jun 2014)

bugbear":9xxdh3qt said:


> Jacob":9xxdh3qt said:
> 
> 
> > And yes an oilstone and a strop do work.
> ...



I usually only use the Black Ark on chisels FWIW. I'm babying a set of Marples straight firmers that I'd like to last the rest of my 'career' as it were. I've come to love those chisels.

I'm confused about what you use in your shop. Are you an oilstone man?


----------



## bugbear (27 Jun 2014)

CStanford":32p490vm said:


> bugbear":32p490vm said:
> 
> 
> > Jacob":32p490vm said:
> ...



I've got diamond pastes, waterstones, oilstones (cheap for those with patience  ), SiC, AlZi and quite a few strops.

They all seem to create sharp edges, when used in ways that suit their particular and divergent properties.

BugBear


----------



## Phil Pascoe (27 Jun 2014)

Cheap for those with patience? I picked up a very nice extremely fine oilstone last week for a quid. The fine Norton at Axi is nearly £30. :shock:


----------



## bugbear (27 Jun 2014)

phil.p":3enjw72z said:


> Cheap for those with patience? I picked up a very nice extremely fine oilstone last week for a quid. The fine Norton at Axi is nearly £30. :shock:



Whilst India's are fairly frequent, Washita, Arkansas and Coticule are less so. But they show eventually.  

BugBear


----------

