Water stone for setting bevel

[Gamma]

I have had plenty of fast Cotis that can set bevels but I don't like bevels set on a Coti.
They're always too convex for what I want, it's just not what I am looking for in an edge. Same reason why I prefer harder non-slurrying Cotis to finish on. They still leave convexity in the geometry but it's much more manageable. And to be totally honest, I usually choose edges honed on stones that don't have a tendency to have curvature in their fingerprint. When I want a Coti edge, it is what it is; it's like wanting to put mayo on a cheeseburger. Don't do it often but once in a while I just gotta have it. Just shaved off a Coti a few times recently. Good shaves. But I don't need to scratch that itch compulsively.
I would choose bevel setting on a 1k C over one set on a Coti 100 times out of 100.

 

[Wid]

When I want a Coti edge, it is what it is; it's like wanting to put mayo on a cheeseburger. Don't do it often but once in a while I just gotta have it.

I have to disagree with you on this, mayo belongs on a burger, cheese or not lol

 

[JPO]

They're always too convex for what I want, it's just not what I am looking for in an edge.

That convexity will be removed after a short time with the next stone in the progression.
Removing 1k striations on the other hand usually required some extra stones to cover the midrange.
Fast coticule to jnat is a simple jump. I don't see any of the coticule fingerprint is left when I use it this way .
The total time on the stones is not that different.

 

[JPO]

I honed a simple Dovo 5/8 today,. I used one fast Les Latneuses and one jnat. The edge was killed over the corner of the stone, just to give the coticule something to work with.
Here is the coticule edge. There is almost no visible convexity left by this stone.

After just one slurry dilution on the jnat, I am not able to see any fingerprint, or convexity from the coticule. The edge will probably be a little different then one created by a full synthetic progression.
So, this particular coticule is more then capable of setting presice bevels, and reduce the need for coarse and midrange synthetic stones.

 

[Gamma]

"Will be removed" Maybe not easily. Everything depends on variables not on the table here.
Obviously, any geometry can be fixed on a well chosen following stone.

My point though, is that there is no good reason for me to put that geometry there in the first place.
If I have a stone I don't like, I get rid of it, I don't spend time and waste effort trying to find something to do with it.

After honing constantly on maybe 80-90 different coticules, probably more actually, over a decade or so, I have a very good understanding of what's going on. I've spent hundreds of hours messing with these sorts of progressions.

Sure a following a coti with another stone can eventually correct the curvature in the geometry. If I leave that coti and go to a 3k Chosera, the issue can be gone - maybe I need an extended session though. When the curvature is severe enough, and it usually is when the Coti is fast enough for what I consider to be reasonable bevel setting, then it can require a crapton of work to eliminate.
I personally do not need or want to deal with a correction here, whether it's easy or difficult. If I am going to have to 'fix' the geometry then allowing the curve to be there in the first place was dumb.

There's really no point in doing something I have to fix down the line when I can just do it correctly right out of the gate. By correctly, I am referring to meeting my personal expectations.
Having to remove a curved bevel is like using the burr method to set a bevel. Totally unnecessary to create a burr on a razor, only to have to remove it. If I put a curve into a bevel with a Coti it was done intentionally so I get a 'coti edge', not for the purpose of removing the Coti effect on the next stone.

I got past doing things because I 'can' a loooong time ago.
I learned to just do things correctly from the start.
And I don't like bevels set on a coticule because I don't want that curvature there. I know how to remove curvature, or fix just abvout any geometry situation, that's all captain obvious work for anyone that has spent a minute working seriously on this craft.. My goal though, is to avoid doing things that make the job harder.

I don't need to use a Coti to go to Jnat. I just use the Jnat.
Using a Coti before Jnat doesn't make anything better and it can, usually will, get in my way. Typically, if I had a 'bevel setting' coticule I'd go to a 3k-ish synth afterwards to clean things up. I am not a fan of Coticule striation patterns under a Jnat edge and I don't feel any need to beat up my Jnats trying to level out that topology.

 

[JPO]

I am not a fan of Coticule striation patterns under a Jnat edge and I don't feel any need to beat up my Jnats trying to level out that topology.

If I did not have this particular coticule I would agree. I have another coarse LL that leaves the edge looking like a train wrek. I would not like those striations under a jnat finish either. So, this mighty be more typical of what you get with coarser coticules.
This is the only coticule I have that wil give the bevel a finish quite similar to a jnat finish. It is also really fast with just a light slurry.
So, it might not be wise to generalise too much on my part, but these stones exist.

 

[Gamma]

I'f bet a dollar that if I used that Coticule I'd see the same things I've been seeing from Coticules for the past 10-12 years.

 

[ArtVandelay123]

If everyone were looking at Coticule striations, nobody would ever shave with 'em, lol.

To each their own, if you need something fast a synthetic works well.
If not a lot of work needs done, I'll always use a natural. I despise using synthetics.

They always take off much more steel than naturals would. With the tempering in mind of the thicker spine and smaller edge, where the edge is harder than the spine, my synthetics always take off too much spine for my liking (which is not an issue and will not cause geometry issues, that's not the point, I just don't like synhetics). But I'll use them when my naturals are too slow. My BBWs and Cotis just take off less steel and refine much easier and neater; just don't look at them under a microscope.

That said, both work, well.

But, my favorite things is using a BBW dry (shunn, a heretic!) and go from there, fast, keen and good edges. Only need a bit of refining/finishing and done. You can go to a Coticule dry after that and you'll get very good edges.
Do a very small Dilucot after that or just finish on water and you'll get a solid Coticule edge.

A BBW dry easily is on par speedness wise with medium thick slurry on a Coti without convexing any bevels, but your edge will be insanely sharp, not the smoothest for shaving, but not bad, either.

Once the garnets get worn down a bit and the stone gets glazed some when using them dry, they deliver good results ime.

 

[JPO]

I'f bet a dollar that if I used that Coticule I'd see the same things I've been seeing from Coticules for the past 10-12 years.

15 years ago, the Internet was an escape from the real world. Today, the real world is an escape from the Internet.

I must be living in the matrix. My experience is probably just a figment of my imagination.

I must have taken the wrong pill.

 

[Herrenberg]

Glad to know there are new honing experiences I can have without shelling out money.

Off to try my coticules and BBWs dry. If it works out horribly, you will hear from me.

 

[lightfoot]

So the 1st 1K I purchased was the Naniwa Pro 1K. Great stone and some suggest it’s the best 1K ever produced.

Later I picked up the Shapton Pro 1.5K and found that while it offers a different kind of feedback it’s interchangeable with the Naniwa Pro as many have commented over time.

The strange thing is that while I kind of favored the Naniwa Pro 1K it seldom saw any use after purchasing the Shapton 1.5K and to this day I’m not sure why…

My current go-to stone for this job is the Shapton Pro 2K. And while I admit it does have a peculiar feedback that some might not be able to adjust to, I have a better synergy with that stone.

 

[Herrenberg]

So the 1st 1K I purchased was the Naniwa Pro 1K. Great stone and some suggest it’s the best 1K ever produced.

Later I picked up the Shapton Pro 1.5K and found that while it offers a different kind of feedback it’s interchangeable with the Naniwa Pro as many have commented over time.

The strange thing is that while I kind of favored the Naniwa Pro 1K it seldom saw any use after purchasing the Shapton 1.5K and to this day I’m not sure why…

My current go-to stone for this job is the Shapton Pro 2K. And while I admit it does have a peculiar feedback that some might not be able to adjust to, I have a better synergy with that stone.

A Shapton Glass (1K or 2K) would be an incremental step along the same road you have already started down. Harder. Less creamy. The other kind of feedback, the one that reports subtly, and reports nothing at all when you have reached the goal, is more stark with the Glass than the Pro.

 

[lightfoot]

I actually have the Shapton 2K Glass too. Much like the Naniwa Pro 1K it goes mostly unused for some reason…

Not sure why.

 

[Herrenberg]

I actually have the Shapton 2K Glass too. Much like the Naniwa Pro 1K it goes mostly unused for some reason…

Not sure why.

The easy answer is that you've found the right bevel setter for you. That's a very good thing.

 

[Gamma]

Whatever color the pills are, they must be pretty potent if they make rhombic dodecahedron shaped garnets capable of abrading steel just like corn flake shaped bits of friable silica.

As for 1k-ish stones, for years I used a Chosera 1k.
Honed tipped me off to the Shapton 1500 though, and when the Choseras started to develop fissure lines I moved over to the Shaptons.
Recently I picked up a Nani Pro 1000 and have used it for most bevel setting work since it arrived.
I don't think I prefer one over the other, both make very accurate bevels.
Neither were expensive.

 

[JPO]

My current go-to stone for this job is the Shapton Pro 2K. And while I admit it does have a peculiar feedback that some might not be able to adjust to, I have a better synergy with that stone.

Allot of times I use my Naniwa pro 2k, which for some reason is not mentioned much. The feedback is nice, and it doesn't glase over or load up. It also seems to cut quite fast.

It might be a little too soft for heavy smiling blades, but I mostly hone singers. Even if I use a 1k stone I use this for a few laps because I have it.

 

[Gamma]

Side by side this morning, Shap Pro 1.5k, Nani Pro 1k, Pro 2k, Glass 1k. The 2k GS cracked in the sink long ago and got tossed; I never replaced it because I found it to be superfluous.

The Shap Pro 2k still seems best suited to tuning up my chef knife.
Like the 2k options, the GS 1k is softer, wears faster, not what I am looking for. Like the 2k Shap Pro, great for knife work sometimes but it is sorta not necessary.

The Nani Pro 1k is a hair faster than the Shap 1.5k, not enough to really matter but it's there. The hardness is about the same but I think I prefer the thickness isolation of the Nani Pro 1k. Feedback is similar enough between the two but the Nani is easier to read.
I don't think I'd grab one over the other for any real reason though. Right now the Nani is in the kitchen so it's getting more use due to location.
Some people complain about the Nani's green slurry but it's never caused me any grief.

Just for funzies I set a Solingen hollow grind bevel on a recently quarried Coti. Meh.
So then I removed the bevel's curvature with the Nani Pro 1k. On point now.

Then i set a Sheffield bevel on Nagura Toishi, still had to fix the geometry afterwards.
The difference here is that moving from honing on a block of Botan to a very hard Jnat with Botan slurry requires less correction than what needs to be done coming off a bevel setting Coticule. I didn't want a synth in that sequence.
Due to rarity and costs, a more prudent move for me is to set the bevel on the 1k synth, then wipe the fingerprint with coarse Nagura slurry on a super hard Jnat.

 

[lightfoot]

Allot of times I use my Naniwa pro 2k, which for some reason is not mentioned much. The feedback is nice, and it doesn't glase over or load up. It also seems to cut quite fast.

It might be a little too soft for heavy smiling blades, but I mostly hone singers. Even if I use a 1k stone I use this for a few laps because I have it.

Oh that reminds me, I have the Naniwa Super Stone 2K and while I don’t use it much it’s a really good stone for light-duty resets.

 

[Gamma]

I have to disagree with you on this, mayo belongs on a burger, cheese or not lol

Somehow I missed this....lol..

I just never have mayo in the house unless I make it and that's a rarity.
Once in a while I get one of those little Hellman's packets though....

 

[JPO]

Here is a short comparison between the shapton pro 1.5k, Naniwa 800 and the Shapton glass hr 1k.
The razor was a gold dollar.

The Naniwa 800 leaves a finer edge then both the shapton stones. It also cuts faster then the shapton pro.
This stone turned out to be a big disappointment to me.

I have lapped the stone several times, and honed a few knifes on it. It still feels coarser and less refined then the Naniwa 800. It also seems to need more time before the water stops sucking into the stone then the Naniwa 800.
Honing feedback is subjective, but the shapton pro is not what I was looking for in a bevel setter. It seems to leave more random deep marks at the apex then the 1k glass stone.

Shapton 1500

Naniwa pro 800

Shapton glass 1k

Finally a 1k to jnat jump to test the cutting ability of my stone.
Dmt slurry followed by a tomo slurry.