Scary or Water? Maybe both!

[jimi43]

Ok...today was the monthly trip to Axminster...as usual I had to come back with something...SO...following a chat with Peter who was busy grinding and honing planes for customers...I was persuaded into trying out some waterstones at last.

Now...I have always been an advocate of using 3M MicroMesh also known as the "Scary Sharp" system, and to date have been very satisfied.

But...as others greater than me have said MANY times before...there is always another sharpening system around the corner....so here are my thoughts...

BIG apologies for those of you who are fed up to the back teeth with sharpening chat...just ignore me!

Ok so...what did Peter con me into buying...well it was this kit:

The whole lot was £55 which I think is rather steep...it would keep me in 3M paper for about a year...but I was assured by Peter's results that it was good value. Well he works there so he would say that I guess!

I have read that some do not get on with waterstone...nor do they produce a particularly sharp edge...but I wanted to see for myself..being an obstinate pipper.

The two stones that come with the kit are 800 and 6000 grit. The 800 is sold as "for grinding" and the 6000 is for polishing/honing.

The kit also comes with a rather nifty rubber stand which works brilliantly! It is so simple but really really effective and the stones don't budge an inch.

I had a feeling that the flattening of the back would be more successful than papers...as the stone is perfectly flat...and indeed it was. My old Stanley iron was a tad out of flat..but the 800 grit soon sorted that out bringing one of the edges of the cutting face into true.

I then mounted the iron in the Veritas honing jig and tried to sharpen the bevel. This I found too slow...and I got bored really quickly. In the end I resorted to using some 1500 mesh 3M cloth first....THEN moving on to the 800 grit stone. This worked perfectly...and I finished off the bevel with the 6000 and then a microbevel with the knob on the jig...just a few strokes.

The results?

MESSY! Very very very messy!

I felt like a blinkin' potter who has had an accident with a pot at a thousand revs.....

But was the iron sharper than before?

Absolutely YES!

Using my acid test of the same old piece of pine...and the pot..the transparency was greatly improved:

Now you can't feel this but I can assure you...this is paper..and very thin paper at that...

Even with beech!

And the smoothness of the final stock is just like silk...

So...am I convinced that these things work...

Well let's just say...THANKS PETER!!

I think this combination of the Micro-mesh and the waterstone is a good marriage...I may even ditch the finer meshes and just get a large sheet of 1500 mesh then move to waterstones in future...we shall see.

Now I am off for another hour to sharpen my No.4 1/2....I can hardly wait to see how that turns out!

I would be interested in any experiences of others here...

I guess "Ice Bear" are fairly "middle-of-the road" as far as quality is concerned...but I think it was money well spent...

Jim

Jim

 

[ByronBlack]

Thanks for the writeup, I'm glad you got a good result. I had the exact same setup including a waterstone pond. I eventually got fed up with the mess and the flattening of the stones, and have since moved to scary sharp, for me personally, I get a better result with scary sharp.

For my scary sharp, I use the 3M lapping films supplied by Matthew at workshop heaven as opposed to the microMesh. The final lapping film (the 5 micron brown one), is equivalent to the 6000 waterstone. What grits of Micromesh do you normally use?

If you are moving from 1500 grit on the micromesh to the 800 grit stone, aren't you undoing the work from the higher grit value of the micromesh?

 

[Aled Dafis]

The final lapping film (the 5 micron brown one), is equivalent to the 6000 waterstone.

The next time you order, get the 1micron paper, the results are amazing!

Cheers

Aled

 

[jimi43]

Hi BB...

1500 is mesh size...equivalent to 400 grit:

Conversion chart.

I went up to 1800 mesh and then moved over to the stones.

I have mesh sizes up to 12000 but I don't usually go any higher than 8000...there is not apparent improvement that I can see. The 6000 stone however seems to create a different edge by polishing rather than abrading....

I did the No 4 1/2 to further test the Clifton chip breakers and the results were measureably better. All wood varieties tested cut equally thinly and consistently but the pine obviously is easier to demonstrate this..

Just to repeat the picture in the Clifton thread:

I am not sure if the mess would do my head in after a while but I think I may just do a freehand wipe over the fine mesh now that I have honed them down to what I am happy with.

Cheers

Jim

 

[ByronBlack]

Aled, its spooky you mention that - I have open this very moment in another tab, the order page with a couple of sheets of the 1 micron - and even a sheet of the 0.3 micron (thought I'd try it out of curiosity).

Jim - thanks for the conversion chart, that makes much more sense now.

The only issue I see with your current findings is that you have introduced two elements - the sharpening and the chipbreaker, so we won't know if the improvements are from the chipbreaker, the sharpening, or both. (Unless I have misunderstood your testing this evening - if so, please correct me).

Either way, it's great to see you get some good results, it's always great to find a way to improve your tools.

 

[woodbloke]

I've been down that waterstone road Jim and I think you've wasted your money...you'd have been better off spending that wonga on some more 3M papers from Matthew - Rob

 

[Saint Simon]

After a year or so of scary sharp I came away from the Alexandra Palace show with 1000 and 8000 water stones. John LLoyd had talked me through it without any honing guide and gave me the confidence to try it free-hand, finding the bevel by feel and then working the stone. I had been watching Rob Cosman's dvds on sharpening with water stones and had a gut feeling it must be easier than all the mucking around with the various grades of paper stuck onto glass.

So back at school with the same sort of stone-holding board use by RC and a Norton flattening stone I had a go. Initial hollow-grind on the Tormek and then onto the stones free-hand. Wonderful. So much faster than setting up in the honing guide and going through all the grades of paper, worrying about tearing them and when they needed replacing. No need to Tormek every time of course, just when the hollow-grind has all gone. And the final sharpness seems brilliant. Regular sharpening just doesn't seem such a drag as with the papers and the finish on the blades after the 8000 stones is mirror like. RC uses a bench grinder rather than a Tormek but the principle is the same.

A water stone convert!
Simon

 

[wizer]

Thanks for the writeup, I'm glad you got a good result. I had the exact same setup including a waterstone pond. I eventually got fed up with the mess and the flattening of the stones, and have since moved to scary sharp, for me personally, I get a better result with scary sharp.

I echo Byrons comments word for word. I had exactly the same experience, tho I went from water stones, to a full set of diamond plates, to scary sharp :roll: The reason I'm going to stick with scary sharp is that it's perfectly adequate for my needs. It makes blades sharp.

 

[jimi43]

Yes BB...I know...any good scientist will tell you NEVER introduce two variables past a control! DOH!

But I was aching to try them both out and it didn't enter my head to do it logically! I suppose I can always shove the old breakers back in and try the tests again...

I think that they are doing two different jobs though...I wouldn't expect the chipbreaker to improve the shavings...maybe the consistency but not the thickness. Mind you...the shavings seem to flow out of the mouth better so it may have an influence.

There is no judder with the Clifton breaker now..I was getting chatter on wilder woods...or on knots...but again this could be down to a better sharpness.

Anyway...you will have to try both now won't you! :wink:

Yeh...I know..I know Rob...and here is me the biggest advocate of 3M MM on the planet. It was the demo by Peter that sold it. He is such an understated salesman...really subtle...lets you see the results and work it out for yourself.

I will say that the key to a really easy use of waterstones is the hollow grind that the Tormek gives. We even discussed this. It's so much easier to freehand a microbevel on the other side of a curve rather than try on the edge of a flat bevel. This is why I am going to continue with the jig for initial setup. Once I get to the stage the iron is at now...I will probably wipe freehand.

I fully expected a divided court on this topic....at the end of the day I like to experiment as I said at the beginning. I like to try new techniques. I will grow up one day!

Feedback is greatly appreciated..I like to hear other experiences...only way to learn IMHO.

Jim

 

[ByronBlack]

Jim - I think the reason why these subjects are always so divisive, is that each individual resonates with a certain technique. I was taught how to free-hand sharpen sans jig on both waterstone and oilstones, and I could get an edge that could shave hairs, however, I just didn't enjoy it, whereas the current setup of jig + papers seems to be a very efficient and minimalist solution that I enjoy.

If waterstones and 3M is giving you results, more power to your elbow. It's a fact that waterstones work. Mr C has proved that numerous times, it's just that for me and some others, we prefer a different method.

At the end of the day, they all work, it just comes down to what you are comfortable using, the more comfortable and 'happy' you are with a setup, the more likely you are to perfect using it.

I was ribbing you about the double test criteria, from the results you have shown, I think its clear you are getting good results from the sharpening as well as the breaker - based on your findings, I will definitely get one for my new QS (if it turns up soon).

 

[jimi43]

The irony is that I am such an advocate of Scary Sharp. I should learn to stick to one thing but my mind gets bored so easily and I have to flit from one thing to another.

I'll settle down one day and retire! :wink:

Nite.

Jim

 

[wizer]

silly boy...

 

[head clansman]

hi guys

I always use to use oil stones by hand guess work , till i joined this forum, then found scary sharp from Mathew , now i wont use anything else, recently bought from Philly a veritas honing jig whilst the Yandle show was on , now i get the same angle ever time, to a very VERY highly polish razor sharp edge, why change if it works , and there's little to no mess. Thats using the old Stanley plane blades , when i sharpen the one and only 2" lie Nielsen blade ooosh keep your finger away from it sssshhharp. hc :wink: :lol:

 

[warrenr]

I am a relative novice to this but one of my first purchases was a Tormek and set of waterstones (I bought an extra rubber support base for the waterstones which I agree are excellent) and a Veritas honing tool. I only use the wet system described above.

I can achieve razor sharpness after some experimentation and practice (the bald patches on my arm prove it). I have lapped my old Record Jointer on float glass (using the lapping base system suggested on this site) down to 180 grit.

With this combination what a difference! Mr Birch, my old woodwork teacher, would be proud.

Less effort, much more control and importantly feel; with a huge increase in quality of finish reflected in paper thin shavings.

Thanks to all you guys on this web site for sharing the helpful and thoughtful guidance. Remember the great value of these exchanges to someone with little experience such as myself.

Richard

 

[Philly]

Jim
Glad to hear you've had a good experience with the waterstones. At £55 you have a set that will last a lifetime, so from point of view, its a bargain.
The fine waterstones give a superb edge - get into a routine of flattening them before use and you will be a happy bunny. Regular truing takes next to no time - if you let them get worn it becomes a chore.
And the results speak for themselves!
Cheers
Philly

 

[Mike H]

Yes Phil, but...

With Scary sharp there is no need to flatten at all! Plate glass will stay flat forever. No Nagura stone etc...

And all 8 grades can easily fit on say 2 A4 sheets of plate glass. One for coarse , one for fine.

The only reason I have kept a few waterstones is that for very narrow chisels, Scary sharp is not ideal at one tends to tear the very fine films.

For all the rest, with just a few drops of water from a spray bottle, not even Camelia oil, and a few back short strokes on each of the 4 finest the results on Scary are just outstanding on a micro bevel. It makes Phil 8) ly Blades sing!

Anyway there are probably as many favourites as there are people when it comes to sharpening! I will not get back to waterstones for mainstream everyday work.

Mike

 

[Philly]

Mike
You're right - all sharpening media have pros and cons. In my humble opinion it is more important to get a sharpening regime that you are comfortable with, that gives you the results you are after and to stick to it. After all, the purpose of sharpening is to get you back working with wood - its not a hobby in itself......... :l
Best regards
Philly

 

[ByronBlack]

Mike
its not a hobby in itself......... :l
Best regards
Philly

What ever gave you that impression? :wink: :lol:

 

[bugbear]

The whole lot was £55 which I think is rather steep...it would keep me in 3M paper for about a year..

So if the stones last more than a year, it's cheaper (obviously!)

BugBear

 

[jimi43]

I am in the process of regrinding and honing another iron in the No 5 1/2 bootfair "basketcase" restoration.

I am still a "fidget" in the road to "comfortable with" situation...but a few more of these restoration projects should lead me to the conclusion which I will post here.

So far we have two thoroughbred systems...I am not sure which one will be first past the post and a keeper yet.

More later.

Jim