Those are superficial scratches. Just ignore them. They will fade in 1-3 uses.
Ozuku?
- Thread starter Anick
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #42
I use a 400 atoma on my coti which is used for middle work because its big. Use it on my jnat not problem. I used it on my thuri but it came with a slurry stone so i just use that now. The atoma created alot of slurry on the thuri. Mine is small so it didnt take much. I guess it also depends how high you take it before you go thuri. Might get by with just water?
No, they are really quite soft. Material will just rain off sandpaper
The Thuri's that i have are absurdly soft, and smoother than anything else i've acquired.
Is it possible to compare them to "grit" rating on synthetics? Would they be up in the 8K range or higher? (or lower even...)
They are finer than 8k but some absolute is not possible with naturals
don't forget the natural variation between stones of the same type. I have three thuri's and they all feel different, and one is quickly becoming my favorite. They all finish at different levels along with the different feels. Between the highest and lowest there would be an estimated Several thousand difference in grit i think...and labeled Thuri's are known for their consistency.
Well yeah but unless they are one of those modern thuris they sell that didn't come from the original source I have never come across one that didn't give a large bump to an 8k level edge. I think the biggest differentiation with the vintage thuris is hardness more than anything. Hardness and speed more than big sways in what it gives. Finest one I had was a droescher. Have had 4 barber's delights at this point and they were the fastest but there was really no fineness advantage. I have a labelled blue green that is very fine. Never had one of those soft fox ones. You play with enough slates and you realize how special the consistency of those old thuris is.
I've been lucky enough to find 2 old boxed Thuri's in the last month, one was a "Genuine" and one was a "celebrated." The Celebrated is by far the smoothest stone i've ever felt...my brain felt it as soft and i kept stroking its surface on the drive home...it felt so much softer than the other one i had. My wife says i'm crazy and they feel the same...but the shave was exceptional.
That's good to hear! I hope my one turns out to be OK... it's a "Celebrated"
It is possible, just not practical with our gear. Synthetics are rated based on avg particle size and a scale of limits. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it's something like... JIS 4k = 3mu avg with <5% over 5mu and less than 1% over 8mu... that sort of setup. It's not hard to sample slurry, measure sizes throughout a sample, and calculate these values to measure it equivalently to a synthetic grading. But, it requires equipment we don't have. And then of course people will point out that you can't measure a natural against a synth based on grit... but frankly you can't measure a synth against a synth based on grit. If you could, a Norton razor hone wouldn't sell for $1000. A frictionite wouldn't sell for $200. The makeup of synthetics differ enough (especially if you add ceramics, oilstones, and other forms different from your typical binder + abrasive baked and smoothed recipe) that their grit is probably no more relevant to comparisons across types than a calculated Natural hones would be.
With that said, even with very simple scoping, it's pretty apparent that most natural finishers tend to have particles as small or smaller than a good quality "razor finisher" synthetic. We're talking 10-30k. The idea that modern synthetics have smaller max particle sizes than all natural stones and it's some mythical power of natural stones to shave well is a bit misguided. What I've noticed is that natural (razor) stones seem to have more consistent particle sizing than all but the finest synthetics... and I suspect that's deliberate, as some variance in particle sizes is often desirable for a lot of tool honing. This becomes less true at extremely high grit stones, because their purpose is usually polishing and not reshaping of tools. There is where the disparity in shave quality between naturals and synthetics becomes a question of the difference between the two. And I'm not certain I can answer that. It's not bevel rounding due to auto-slurry from every single natural and no single synthetic, as I've seen put forward by many people. That's provably wrong. My suspicion is that it's due to the engineering of high grit synthetics to polish. They are designed to do as little work as possible at the apex of the edge, but to polish the bevel. This results in an imperfect edge at extremely high refinement levels, that a hone which may (but isn't necessarily) even be less fine in particle size, but which is more effective at removing steel from the apex because it was not literally designed to avoid doing so avoids. So your bevel won't shine as much off a natural, but the edge will be sharper. And that is where I diverge from the general consensus of smooth being different from sharp. A sense that a thinner, jagged edge, is sharper than a thin smooth edge has developed which I disagree with. One may shave you closer, while tearing your neck. That's not sharper. Sharp blades do not tear. The less close shave that doesn't tear is definably sharper. And a decade of bending over backwards has happened as people try to justify this sharp but not smooth and smooth but not sharp logic. When the fact of the matter is, a shave that isn't smooth is not sharp, certainly not "too sharp". It's a damaged edge, which is the opposite of a sharp edge.
But that's my rant before work for today.
With that said, even with very simple scoping, it's pretty apparent that most natural finishers tend to have particles as small or smaller than a good quality "razor finisher" synthetic. We're talking 10-30k. The idea that modern synthetics have smaller max particle sizes than all natural stones and it's some mythical power of natural stones to shave well is a bit misguided. What I've noticed is that natural (razor) stones seem to have more consistent particle sizing than all but the finest synthetics... and I suspect that's deliberate, as some variance in particle sizes is often desirable for a lot of tool honing. This becomes less true at extremely high grit stones, because their purpose is usually polishing and not reshaping of tools. There is where the disparity in shave quality between naturals and synthetics becomes a question of the difference between the two. And I'm not certain I can answer that. It's not bevel rounding due to auto-slurry from every single natural and no single synthetic, as I've seen put forward by many people. That's provably wrong. My suspicion is that it's due to the engineering of high grit synthetics to polish. They are designed to do as little work as possible at the apex of the edge, but to polish the bevel. This results in an imperfect edge at extremely high refinement levels, that a hone which may (but isn't necessarily) even be less fine in particle size, but which is more effective at removing steel from the apex because it was not literally designed to avoid doing so avoids. So your bevel won't shine as much off a natural, but the edge will be sharper. And that is where I diverge from the general consensus of smooth being different from sharp. A sense that a thinner, jagged edge, is sharper than a thin smooth edge has developed which I disagree with. One may shave you closer, while tearing your neck. That's not sharper. Sharp blades do not tear. The less close shave that doesn't tear is definably sharper. And a decade of bending over backwards has happened as people try to justify this sharp but not smooth and smooth but not sharp logic. When the fact of the matter is, a shave that isn't smooth is not sharp, certainly not "too sharp". It's a damaged edge, which is the opposite of a sharp edge.
But that's my rant before work for today.
- Thread starter
- #52
@SliceOfLife i agree with you in the little time i have straight shaving. I have one that was finished on synthetic and my face has been raw a few days. One finished on paste gives me burn with AS just after one wtg pass. Coti, ozuku, and thuri i have provide 2 pass shave without irritation or burn.
I love Ozuku stones, and they are usually very hard and great finishing stones. I've several, but would part with one or two for the right moolah. I got into Ozuku stones rather late, not to say they are all the same, but the ones I have gotten, usually the darker slate colored, so called "asagi" stones are very hard. I shave off of them very well too.
Well if that's true, I'm happy as hell with my fakes. I could care less if they call them the Star Spangle Bannered Special Unicorn, Dragon prototype Christmas Hones made by God and sold by Christopher Walken. Maybe "John" Voight owned them and left his razor marks on the bottom. Consequently, if you can't tell they are real, how can you tell they are 'fake?' An honest and serious question. I really mean it, how can one tell they aren't real or what the vendor says they are? Especially since we aren't able to tell that they are the thing they claim them to be.
- Thread starter
- #55
Well if that's true, I'm happy as hell with my fakes. I could care less if they call them the Star Spangle Bannered Special Unicorn, Dragon prototype Christmas Hones made by God and sold by Christopher Walken. Maybe "John" Voight owned them and left his razor marks on the bottom. Consequently, if you can't tell they are real, how can you tell they are 'fake?' An honest and serious question. I really mean it, how can one tell they aren't real or what the vendor says they are? Especially since we aren't able to tell that they are the thing they claim them to be.[/QUOTE]
Im with you. I guess the only way we can is to have jnats that are from a reliable source and compare ours to theirs...but im sure there is even variations within a mine. It would be nice if we could send our stone to someone to get graded. Like comics or coins. Then we could chase a standard rather than a pedigree.
Im with you. I guess the only way we can is to have jnats that are from a reliable source and compare ours to theirs...but im sure there is even variations within a mine. It would be nice if we could send our stone to someone to get graded. Like comics or coins. Then we could chase a standard rather than a pedigree.
Yeah. I mean, how can someone PROVE without having been at the actual mine, or followed the stone through each owner, that the stone is what the seller says it is. I mean, I try to rationalize it by saying to myself, they named the hole in the ground, and brought stones out of that hole. Some stones are considered great for polishing and grinding, and others are not. Stones are made up of different physical materials of varying quantities, and how much of one thing makes a stone better or worse than the other thing? This is what goes through my deranged mind in the middle of the night when I can't sleep. Haha! Too bad stones don't have VIN numbers!
You see it in the Art and Collectibles world, often referred to as "Provenance". Basically a body of evidence and expert opinion of varying value. The collected body of that evidence about a piece will give the comfort to buyers to accept the piece as what it is purported to be. "Certificates of Authenticity" done up on fancy paper and such.
But to your point there is no equivalent of a VIN number on a stone and even the biggest auction houses get caught by very good fraudsters from time to time.
I don't have the money to buy razors or stones with great "Provenance". So when a reputable seller or B&B member says that they have something quality to sell at a reasonable price I go for it. They are prepared to put their name behind their opinion of quality. Good enough for me.
You kind of have to know where Disburdens statement came from. Some time ago certain sellers started hauling end cuts from hardware stores or wherever they picked those pieces of stones and selling them as Ohzuku for razors. Then a lot of people didn't like them because they were really not razor stones so no surprise there. So next you have this whole drama about Ohzuku and people who knew better tried to correct the sentiment saying don't throw all Ohzuku in the same basket. We not even know if that is Ohzuku, just because a stone is stupid hard doesn't make it Ohzuku or a razor stone.
The truth is that a lot of people slap a name on a rock and they truly have no clue where it came from but it sells better when it has a name. Any kind of name. We don't hone on names so as long as you are buying a stone that was tested on razors you will be fine.
The truth is that a lot of people slap a name on a rock and they truly have no clue where it came from but it sells better when it has a name. Any kind of name. We don't hone on names so as long as you are buying a stone that was tested on razors you will be fine.
So true - something I should have noted in my post is that unlike Art and Collectibles, razor hones can actually be tested to see whether they are the real deal. They are working tools.
I am reminded every day at auction that many people purchase Jnats not merely for function, as there are a ton of gray, basically slate, or slate like rocks out there that will finish your razor to a fine and keen edge. But I am one of those guys, yeah, I can get to the store in a station wagon - but it isn’t that I got there but how I did it. So beauty CAN be very important and definitely, directly affects the value of the rock.
If one is looking for all the scientific buzz words like “verification,” when buying Jnats, good luck. I think the proof comes more from a long term business relationship that establishes a person’s honesty but also, more importantly, their judgment in buying Jnats.
Proof comes in many different forms and many people are unwilling to accept one form whereas others are perfectly content with the same. In my case I have made sure I am buying Jnats from a trusted and knowledgeable business associate. Someone that isn’t merely a broker or middle man but a person that knows what they are talking about. In addition, if they are a middle man, then they must have this same business relationship that I have with them with their supplier of Jnats and I want that supplier to offer proof they’ve used the Jnat and actually tested it. Otherwise I ask the middle man to do this if they are the person currently with the stone.
I sell them and am very cautious with what I get because I don’t like passing off bunk stuff to other people. It’s not my way. Learning how to avoid getting burned in the world of Jnats can be an expensive lesson.
If one is looking for all the scientific buzz words like “verification,” when buying Jnats, good luck. I think the proof comes more from a long term business relationship that establishes a person’s honesty but also, more importantly, their judgment in buying Jnats.
Proof comes in many different forms and many people are unwilling to accept one form whereas others are perfectly content with the same. In my case I have made sure I am buying Jnats from a trusted and knowledgeable business associate. Someone that isn’t merely a broker or middle man but a person that knows what they are talking about. In addition, if they are a middle man, then they must have this same business relationship that I have with them with their supplier of Jnats and I want that supplier to offer proof they’ve used the Jnat and actually tested it. Otherwise I ask the middle man to do this if they are the person currently with the stone.
I sell them and am very cautious with what I get because I don’t like passing off bunk stuff to other people. It’s not my way. Learning how to avoid getting burned in the world of Jnats can be an expensive lesson.
Similar threads
