Shapton glass HR 16k

[Toro Blanco]

I was giving a first hand experience, were you? I had the the full set. I contacted shapton directly and they did not recommend the 16k or 30k. As to the OP question I was right they do not recommend! Or am I wrong. They must have reformulated it in some way to recommend the 30k. If you go to shapton jp they still say a knife and tool stone.

You stated you did not have them so you are speaking second hand. I am giving a first hand account. Right?

As they say " Get off your high horse son you might fall off" Lol! Nuff said.

 

[SliceOfLife]

I have a lot of experience with people who can't figure out what they're doing wrong blaming their equipment. The razor experts love to do so.

And there's at least two fairly extensively documented looks at the 16k microchipping.

Both have images of about 10-40x and edges that most people could tell at a glance need to be ground back.

Here's a mix of images from these two articles.

Look at them closely.

 

[SliceOfLife]

Now look again.


Excuse me for putting negative stock in people arguing about how a hone causes chipping using pics like these.

 

[Toro Blanco]

You should work for shapton then. So you can teach them! Lol!

Like I said get off your high horse son!

 

[Gamma]

@SliceOfLife has made some good points.

Shapton did not recommend them in a left handed way. They just X'd them off on the graph/chart where they listed tasks vs stones. When that famous poster was first printed - pre 2010 I think - they never said - "don't use the 16k/30k" for razors. They just didn't recommend them. And yes, there is a difference. I have no idea what they are hawking as info now. I stopped paying attention to marketing hype a long time ago.

Shapton has some odd business practices, their info is often contradictory and sometimes misleading. I have two of Shapton's user guides here somewhere; one says soak their stones, the other says never soak their stones. Personally, I put minimal stock into info gleaned from marketing materials.

The finest GS Shapton 'recommended' for honing razors was the 10k.
Why? Well, they haven't given me a straight answer. I suspect there are at least two factors at play and one of them very well may be that Shapton believes no one needs anything finer than a 10k stone to finish a razor. That's conjecture on my part, based on conversations with them. I run into this manner of thinking quite often.

A while back I read the 'blurb' about the PSD in the 16k being very broad and I have not found any info to support that and in use I do not see that as factual. But, sample size matters and I've only used one 16k. Still, the majority of users always said that the 16k's 'grit' is very consistent. IIRC, one company that posted that PSD disclaimer also contradicted themselves about that in another part of their website. The story gets pretty murky and I tend to go with the results from users I know to have good game rather than info scraped off retail websites.

FWIW - the "3rd party" 'tests' showing those plates causing microchipping are nearly laughable. At best, a lot of it is willful ignorance and at worst it is a giant pile of confirmation bias behind hidden agendas.

Regardless of marketing-speak...
IME - the 16k & 30k require a very well done edge to begin with, and lap counts must be low.
By low I mean 6-12, and the pressure has to be spot-on.
Too many laps or too much pressure, the edge's apex can become 'rough'. The exact cut-off point will depend on the razor's geometry and makeup. So - trial by error is the only way to go.

The same edge distractions can occur using other hones also, but not as fast or as easily. Trying to use the 16k GS to clean up poorly done pre-8k work is going to bring on a nasty edge.
Use them correctly and sparingly and the edges can be pretty nice for what they are. Honestly, after the 10k the 16k can sit on the sidelines and the 30k will bump the edge nicely with 5-8 passes across 6" of stone.
I am not a fan of finishing on synthetics but the GS 16k and 30k will work when used correctly.

IMO, saying the 16k/30k are no good for razors because they chip is like saying a stove is not good for baking because it can burn your cake. I see the situation as more of a matter of perspective than anything else.

 

[gary haywood]

Sounds like a finicky stone to me .

 

[stone and strop]

Now look again.


Excuse me for putting negative stock in people arguing about how a hone causes chipping using pics like these.

In the pics you have circled there is obvious signs of pitting causing chipping at the edge but what about where the edge is still crap but no sign of pitting?
Its not always pitting that causes this.
It can be a variety of things including poor edge management prior to using that particular stone as well as steel that won't tolerate the abrasive or thinness of edge, pressure etc .
I have seen razors that start to rebel at 8k synthetic in that way. They need a different medium to bring the edge to fruition IMO.

 

[SliceOfLife]

Yeah there are a lot of things that can cause damage to a razor edge. And if someone’s testing to see if a stone causes damage to a razor edge In a case where another stone would not, I would expect them to remove such obvious examples of these things to avoid them interfering with the results. The fact that they did not makes me worry that they are also not controlling for any of the other variables. To steal Gammas cake analogy...

They are telling you that an electric oven burns your cake and “proving“ it with a demonstration where they have set the oven to 650°. Maybe they’re putting the cake on the bottom of the oven too, I can’t see that they’re not. Maybe they’re putting several times the normal amount of sugar in the cake, I can’t see that they’re not. What I can see is that they are cooking at the wrong temperature which makes me suspect they may be doing other things wrong too. I don’t think that I’ve ever baked a cake in an electric oven, but I’m pretty sure it works just fine.

 

[gary haywood]

Well I must say the 4K and 8k Shapton glass are spot on the shave of the 8k is very good for 8k .

 

[MO1]

Well I must say the 4K and 8k Shapton glass are spot on the shave of the 8k is very good for 8k .

Agreed. Very nice consistent stones! A shame they are on the thinner side.

 

[MO1]

Sorry for bumping this but this may be of interest to someone who finds this thread later.
Drmatt just posted a video about the shapton stone.

 

[global_dev]

Sorry for bumping this but this may be of interest to someone who finds this thread later.
Drmatt just posted a video about the shapton stone.

interesting video, I’ve never used a shapton glass nor knowingly had a shave with one finished by a 16k glass.

 

[gary haywood]

Thank you Matt for maki g that video I am glad I asked you about the 16k? I thought if any one would find out it would be you

 

[SliceOfLife]

Is the nanocloth he's using a compressive substrate?

If so... that's exactly what I'd expect to see polishing on a fine grit compressive substrate then going to a stone. He's hiding, not eliminating lower grit scratches through plastic deformation on the compressive substrate and then revealing them again on the hard stone. I see the same thing with guys who use crummy midrange stones and a lot of slurry in their progression then go to a good finisher. Finisher peels off all the garbage they built up dispersing the focal light and hiding scratch patterns, then they see a bunch of beveler scars remaining and blame their finisher. You can take a razor off a beveling stone and abrasive strop it to get an edge that looks like his before pics, but the second you hit a STONE again, you're gonna reveal a ton of scars you haven't removed. Not your finisher's fault unless you're mad it revealed the mistake you made prior.

As for his Naniwa... which hone did he test last? The Naniwa? So... as he's doing more and more work on the edge (that was underrefined), he's seeing less damage underneath? Yeah... he's basically "pyramid" honing on his finishers and this nanocloth. Add to that the Naniwa creating more slurry and keeping things obscured? Almost predictable what he's seeing.

"I'd Never do 50 passes on a finishing stone"

That says everything I need to know. If your finisher has a "max" either your finisher sucks or you aren't doing sufficient midrange refinement and you're avoiding the finisher revealing that. Or your finishing technique causes excessive wear near the apex of the edge, which means you need to improve your technique.


Overhoning is a myth created by people who didn't know what the problem is, but noticed the problem was revealed as they honed more. Correlation != causation. It's like peeling a rotten orange and thinking that peeling it made it rot. The only place "Overhoning" exists is when you're pushing the boundary of the steels capabilities... which shouldn't be happening on a decent razor at any level of refinement that is distinguishable with optical magnification. I've looked up to .25 micron refinement at 800x as low as 13* and any good steel won't tear even there; Gold dollars aren't quite up to par on the steel range, but their default angle being ~19*, you shouldn't be able to make them tear anywhere we can see. Note, this assumes you aren't creating an extreme amount of flex at the edge with your technique and adding excessive fatigue into the equation.

 

[Toro Blanco]

Crazy what you can find out with good magnification!

Some people will never admit they are wrong even when it is staring them in the face. Always have a excuse. Lol!

Hopefully this is a good learning experience.

 

[SliceOfLife]

In order:

Here's a GD Razor I've had sitting around for a few years, probably a Thuri finish is my guess. Guaranteed not a perfect finish, but shaveable.

After 100 passes on a .72mu synth
After 500 passes on a .72mu synth

The worst defect... 1.4mu depth.

Here's a GD Razor with a fresh 9mu bevel.
After Several dozen passes on a slow slurried midrange slate...
After 10 passes on a .72mu synth
After 20...
After 50...

Worst defect? 4+mu depth... pretty clearly the result of an uncovered beveler scar.

After ~200? Starting to actually improve again as the finisher begins doing what should have been done on the midrange stone.


Want to see it even worse? I can switch to a beveler that isn't broken in to <3mu cutting depth or heck using a beveler with slurry and we can start to get some REAL scars to reveal. I can probably pop out some 10mu + holes from "overhoning".

 

[SliceOfLife]

Beveled on a 800 grit stone.
I've not owned a compressive pasted surface in a decade, so I can't fake a bullet clean edge quickly without risking actually honing it properly, but some paper and .5 film gives a pretty reasonable looking edge (<2mu max defect depth)
10 passes on .72 micron
20 passes and oh no, overhoning
50 passes and it's so bad... so much overhoning
"Aggressive" half strokes and this Hone must be so awful, look at that overhoning! (~13mu defect depth if you're curious... I did it! 10+mu woooo!)


Sorry if I seem abrubt, but this is what people call overhoning, and this is what causes claims of "chippy" hones, and a few hours with a scope and the slightest bit of curiosity disproves it unless for some reason you choose to keep believing in it and deliberately or subconsciously ignore variables in your process to allow your continued erroneous thinking. So it's rather tedious seeing people constantly rehash theories that are so easy to disprove because most people lack the means to actually discover the failure of their method themselves.

 

[JoWolf]

This is question for Shapton glass users. I have the 4K and 8k Shapton glass and quite like them . I also have a 16k arrived today but I am considering not trying it and sending it back . Reason being I read on the internet that the 16k can cause micro chipping in the razors edge ?? Any info would be appreciated?
Btw I have shaved of the 8k Shapton glass and to be fair it was a good shave at that level .

If your looking for answers. Dr Matt has some good photos. I have the Naniwa 12K which I haven’t used yet. It has received good reviews and mentions.

 

[Ridgeback]

Chipping???...I do believe the term would be edge fallout and the steel type has Alot to do with it.

 

[SliceOfLife]

I'm only finding the term edge fallout once online... in a blade forums post showing 500x SEM shots of a DMT 1200 edge. Could you provide a brief summary of its meaning? From that post it looks like it's the gap created with a striation on one face of the bevel crosses a striation on the other face of the bevel at the edge due to the two faces not being perfect mirrors of each other and the resulting steel failing because it's essentially dug out on one side and much thinner than the edge radius. Is that correct?

If so, yes, that's a fair distinction. But most people, looking through a loupe or a 100x scope are going to see the resulting "gap" on the 2d projection of the bevel viewed from a single side as a "microchip". "Edge fallout" gets more into the why, whereas they are only really defining the what. And I agree, that's kind of what I'm hoping people start to understand... that these chips can mean many different things and can be caused by a variety of things... in this case possibly this "edge fallout"... and so simplifying it to a binary: "I honed on this and it caused chips therefore this causes chips" is grossly misunderstanding the honing process. I'd almost call it lazy. It's noticing that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west and saying that the sun must move around the Earth.