I want to try another Jnat and was wondering how these stones are? I had an Oozuku before and haven't heard of these before and was wondering if anyone has one and how they like it? Thanks
Shuobudani Jnat?
- Thread starter MilkyLee
- Start date
I only have a type100 shoubi from JNS and it's a very hard and smooth stone. Type100 is only the size, a little over 6x2 but that's fine with me.
I use it with a Botan, Tenjyou and Mejiro naguras and a tomonagura. After bevel is set and using the full nagura progression its easy and relatively fast to get a razor scary sharp and yet very smooth.
With only a tomonagura (piece of the same stone) it's an excellent finisher or touchup hone but with the asano naguras (botan, tenjyou, mejiro and maybe a koma if you can find one) that one stone is all you'll ever need except maybe a courser stone to set a bevel.
I use it with a Botan, Tenjyou and Mejiro naguras and a tomonagura. After bevel is set and using the full nagura progression its easy and relatively fast to get a razor scary sharp and yet very smooth.
With only a tomonagura (piece of the same stone) it's an excellent finisher or touchup hone but with the asano naguras (botan, tenjyou, mejiro and maybe a koma if you can find one) that one stone is all you'll ever need except maybe a courser stone to set a bevel.
I have a coarser Shoubudani that I use before my Oozuku and it's great. Mine is a bit softer but it's very fast when using my botan/tenjou nagura to get the edge ready for finishing. I've heard finisher-class Shoubudani stones are awesome, I think JNS has a couple right now.
The name of the mine isn't all that important. I'f it's a good hard stone, where it came from is irrelevant for the most part.
The stone's qualities are the first consideration, hardness and particle density seem, to me, to be two critical concerns. It's claimed that all Jnats have abrasive particles that all fall into the same size range. If that is an absolute truth, then hardness and density would be the main factors. Personally, I think there's more to it than just those numbers, but until I get the Kyoto Whetstone Manual translated, I have to fly on instinct and input from long-term Jnat users.
After the stone itself,, technique plays a big hand.
I'm not convinced that a slightly softer stone is a distraction 100% of the time.
The stone's qualities are the first consideration, hardness and particle density seem, to me, to be two critical concerns. It's claimed that all Jnats have abrasive particles that all fall into the same size range. If that is an absolute truth, then hardness and density would be the main factors. Personally, I think there's more to it than just those numbers, but until I get the Kyoto Whetstone Manual translated, I have to fly on instinct and input from long-term Jnat users.
After the stone itself,, technique plays a big hand.
I'm not convinced that a slightly softer stone is a distraction 100% of the time.
Sounds like a good project for my wife, you have a link handy?
As far as I know, there is no online version of it anywhere.
I have one copy of it though.
My plan was to photocopy it, and then find someone to translate it. I've read that there are technical parts that are very difficult to interpret.
The pix inside, even though they are not stellar quality images, are enough to keep me entertained, but I do really want to get it translated. As an aside - I don't know if copying it is legal. I'm sure that distributing copies of it, online or otherwise, wouldn't be though.
Hi Dusty. I have a shobudani JNAT (bought from JNS). I havent used it too much but have been pleased with the results when I have. Doc is borrowing it currently and I believe has also gotten positive results from it.
- Thread starter
- #9
Thanks everyone for posting. I guess I should have been more precise with my question. I meant if anyone had experience with a shobudani 100 type from JNS, which most of you answered with, so it worked out anyways. Thanks again!
