Washita Thread. Show off, discuss, etc.

[Legion]

I have one that looks like that and mine may not be a certified washita from norton but it surely isn't a soft ark. Let me know what you think of it, I've been looking at that company for a variety of stones. You can feel the difference when you take steel across it. Washitas feel more aggressive but in a weird way, feedback feels like tiny, smooth, little rounded bumps very consistently though it's eating steel like it gets paid to do it. I've gotten stones that were called soft arks that felt like washitas to be because of their weight and texture. I'm finding now washitas have an enormous range, one as big as classic arks. They can go from crazy soft and work like 220 grit sandpaper to VERY dense and hard like the hardest of black arks(amass as fine too). I don't think anyone can give you an all encompassing answer. You got to try them out. Use the name as a general guide and judge the stones merits on the stone. Also, cheap doesn't mean crappy in every circumstance!

I just tried it on an old pocket knife, and it got it shaving arm hair without much trouble. It’s fiddly being so small though.

 

[timwcic]

Ouachita, Washita, whatever. The stone was named for the region it was found in. It doesn't come out of the same pit as Arks, it's a different stone, no matter the SPG or more recent marketing ploys by manufactures.

I still have found no evidence to back this up, but years ago I picked the brain of a retired Norton worker. When I asked the location of the original Washitas, LL-RR-#1, and such he told me the original mines were flooded by Lake Ouachita during the TVA push. There have been some good stones since then, but the originals have never been duplicated. The newer, 1950 and on, are most likely marketing to keep the name alive

 

[Empire straights]

I just tried it on an old pocket knife, and it got it shaving arm hair without much trouble. It’s fiddly being so small though.

For razor I prefer small stones in the hand stones but having a big washita comes in handy especially if you have to sharpen axes or anything larger.

 

[Legion]

For razor I prefer small stones in the hand stones but having a big washita comes in handy especially if you have to sharpen axes or anything larger.

Yeah, I don’t mind a small stone for a razor. Anything down to 5” is ok. But this is a little knife stone, the size you might see in a pocket on a sheath.

 

[Empire straights]

Yeah, I don’t mind a small stone for a razor. Anything down to 5” is ok. But this is a little knife stone, the size you might see in a pocket on a sheath.

I've got a 4" x 1 1/2" x 3/8" slip stone I use a ton on razors and knives. I bought one of dans black large pocket stone 4x 1 5/8 x 1/2. I'm going to get them to make me a combo stone with a hard/ true hard in that size and I think it'll be an awesome razor stone. I use pocket stones at work a lot because I don't want to break my bench stones. I broke the corner off a 2x4 vintage combo ark yesterday at work, it was sad.

 

[ErieSurfer]

I just came across this in Henk Bos' first PDF:

 

[Empire straights]

I just came across this in Henk Bos' first PDF:

View attachment 1325835

That's extremely interesting. I really need to sit and read Henks grinding and honing

 

[ErieSurfer]

That's extremely interesting. I really need to sit and read Henks grinding and honing

I have the same problem. I dig into them when I'm looking for an answer. I need to read them front to back.

I dropped that snip in here because I thought it might help folks differentiate various unlabeled arks. Someone in here (@Bowmaker ?) measured absorbency for different arks, and I know porosity is related but different. Maybe one of our resident geologists could tie the two concepts together.

 

[timwcic]

Over the years I have seen dozens, if not hundreds of these cast iron stone holders. All have had some type of India or SIC style stone, until this one. A 6” Norton #1 looked back at me when I opened it up. Stone is uber white and pristine. My first thought was it is a marriage, but both look to be unused. I am going to assume it is a factory package. Stone has no sign of oil or swarf. The cast is still shining inside, almost no rust or oil drippings. Someone took good care and storage over the decades and never put it to use

 

[Empire straights]

. I got an old smith's pocket washita and it's like the arkansas oilstones washita, also like the buck knives #134 but they are different than the big ones I have and the smith's in the cedar box, it's denser than the light ones but not as dense as the big ones. It's a about a coarse as the big ones, but the less dense ones are finer and I'm almost certain they are all the same mineral composition just different configurations. It's pretty nice being able to do the whole progression with them because it's like regular arks in almost the same in every way for final effect but they cut about 2x faster with equal pressure.

 

[cotedupy]

Over the years I have seen dozens, if not hundreds of these cast iron stone holders. All have had some type of India or SIC style stone, until this one. A 6” Norton #1 looked back at me when I opened it up. Stone is uber white and pristine. My first thought was it is a marriage, but both look to be unused. I am going to assume it is a factory package. Stone has no sign of oil or swarf. The cast is still shining inside, almost no rust or oil drippings. Someone took good care and storage over the decades and never put it to use

View attachment 1328002View attachment 1328003View attachment 1328004View attachment 1328005

Lovely find!

I'm sure you don't need me to tell you this, but - yes I can't imagine that stone can ever have been used. The completely new Lily White I've posted somewhere on this thread I tried on one side, a couple of times for about three mins in total. And I don't think there'd be any way of restoring that side to looking like the other without lapping it away. I've tried cleaning with a few things now, but even after very light use, the pores on a freshly cut Washita mean the one side will now always be just off-white because of the swarf and oil. Whereas yours above is completely untouched.

Mine is also now a bit translucent at the edge on the side I've used, because of the oil, and the unused side opaque.

 

[cotedupy]

I won this one recently, which looks very like my caramel-coloured Pike, and some of the other pictures suggest it's similarly translucent.

Obviously however the thing that really attracted me, as a dyed-in-the-wool arch-monarchist, was that it once belonged to The Queen of England! Though can't have been much good if she got rid of it after a couple of years, I suppose.

 

[Bowmaker]

I still have found no evidence to back this up, but years ago I picked the brain of a retired Norton worker. When I asked the location of the original Washitas, LL-RR-#1, and such he told me the original mines were flooded by Lake Ouachita during the TVA push. There have been some good stones since then, but the originals have never been duplicated. The newer, 1950 and on, are most likely marketing to keep the name alive

What part, separate mines? Doesn't Norton still own a Washita mine?

 

[Toro Blanco]

Only one Washita mine and Norton/ St. Gobain still owns it. Last run of real wasitas was 2006, there was one before but I can't remember the year and a possible later one ofter 2006 but I am out of the washita loop so I can't confirm it. If I recall though it was a run of thin Washitas after 2006 release a couple of years ago. The 2006 release were full size and thick.

Buck,Case, Hot Springs and a few others I am forgetting are soft arks not true Washitas.I got that from two old timers in their 70's and 80's. One was a authorized retailer for over 50 years and the other was a collectionist.

 

[LJS]

Buck,Case, Hot Springs and a few others I am forgetting are soft arks not true Washitas.

I agree with this statement and can add a few to the list. I will say that I have a few very old buck pocket knife stones that were translucent and very hard. Not sure of dates or when they switched but they came in clear top plastic cases similar to later ones…..but they are little trans stones instead.

 

[timwcic]

What part, separate mines? Doesn't Norton still own a Washita mine?

I was asking about the location of the higher end stones before WW1. The early Pike and the Norton locations. Trying it find a knowledge nugget about why the earlier stone had quality and performance that is missing in post depression era stone of the same names

 

[Empire straights]

I agree with this statement and can add a few to the list. I will say that I have a few very old buck pocket knife stones that were translucent and very hard. Not sure of dates or when they switched but they came in clear top plastic cases similar to later ones…..but they are little trans stones instead.

I've got a buck that's super light and porous and it's the surface it at 220 it eats steel. My small smith's pocket washita(is guess 70's, faux leather poutch) and 5" arkansas oilstone's feel the same. I have 2 really old washitas one is a suspect lww and the other has translucent spots(like a dalmatian, not a cow) and they are both very dense. I've got a 4x 2.5 smith's in a cedar box and it's exactly like the old ones I have. I believe they are all the same material at varying densities and very different from each other. They all will put a very fine, polished edge qvery uickly and in 1000% positive none of them are soft arkansas. I have tons of different grades of soft ark laying around and I've been sharpening on it for 30 years. I've never held an old, labeled Pike washita by but if be willing to bet that every single one is washita by any standard. My grandfather wasn't using one from the 1920s, he was praising the same stones in using and in the different densities. I enjoy digging into the histories of these quarries and searching for rare stones but they are tools, just like razors and hammers and the most important feature any could have is if they function as they should, and efficiently. My little spiel isn't completely fit you I just wanted to throw that out so newer guys don't get discouraged from using these stones. Mine are all good for razors, though very different from each other and they all have fairly similar range. They are probably my favorite stones stones and the only stones I use probably 2x as much and the second most used stones (trans and black arks). I say got for it regardless of when they were mined but you're probably still going to get a fantastic stone, at minimum for knives and everyone uses knives

 

[cotedupy]

I was asking about the location of the higher end stones before WW1. The early Pike and the Norton locations. Trying it find a knowledge nugget about why the earlier stone had quality and performance that is missing in post depression era stone of the same names

The Griswold 1890 Geological survey has a bit about this. He also notes that Chase and Pike are the two companies producing and exporting the Ouachita stone at the time.








Pike apparently then later bought (at least some of) the Sutton quarries. Pic on the right is a sketch of Sutton no.7 from the 1890 Survey, on the right a picture from a later (1905?) Pike pamphlet:

I'm sure people have seen all that already, but for those who haven't, a bit about it here: Washita Oilstones - the small workshop - https://smallworkshop.co.uk/2020/11/14/washita-oilstones/

 

[LJS]

I've never held an old, labeled Pike washita by but if be willing to bet that every single one is washita by any standard.

Mr Empire - it seems like you are trying to convince me that the other stones like smiths etc are the same as old pike washitas? With all respect, you are just not going to get me in that camp. I have plenty of stones and have decided for myself and if it helps you not be bothered by that I am happy just calling it my opinion

But I admit that I am puzzled why you are so emphatic if you have never actually even held bona fide washitas like you state above. Not wishing to continue to debate my own personal opinion on what is or isn’t a “washita”, but it seems strange to be so sure they are the same……if you don’t have even one…..much less a pile of them to form an opinion on?

Machs nicht. If you like you stones, great and be happy That’s all that matters.

And FYI, I wouldn’t use any washita for any razor almost ever. Just me. I have a lot of stones and find much better options personally. Super hard arks are the only ones I touch razors to

 

[Legion]

The Griswold 1890 Geological survey has a bit about this. He also notes that Chase and Pike are the two companies producing and exporting the Ouachita stone at the time.


View attachment 1328449View attachment 1328448View attachment 1328447View attachment 1328450





Pike apparently then later bought (at least some of) the Sutton quarries. Pic on the right is a sketch of Sutton no.7 from the 1890 Survey, on the right a picture from a later (1905?) Pike pamphlet:

View attachment 1328453


I'm sure people have seen all that already, but for those who haven't, a bit about it here: Washita Oilstones - the small workshop - https://smallworkshop.co.uk/2020/11/14/washita-oilstones/

I'd not read that. Interesting, thanks.