Thread: Norton 4000 - 8000 waterstone

QUICK REVIEW:
The Norton 4000 - 8000 waterstone is considered by many to to be the waterstone to use for straight razor honing. When working correctly the Norton 4k/8k is indeed a superlative tool for honing to razor sharpness. However some users report difficulty with the Norton embedded grit problem which can be catastrophic and make the Norton 4k/8k stone completely unusable for honing. Because of this issue the Norton is unacceptable.


A MORE IN DEPTH REVIEW:
The stone needs a complete lapping before it's first use. Norton suggests the Norton lapping stone, but many users prefer a flat hard surface and various grits of wet sandpaper. When honing or lapping the Norton must be used wet with water. This review is based on honing with a 5/8 Dovo Blackstar carbon steel razor in conjunction with one new Norton 4k/8k stone. The Norton stone is about $80 US.

As stated, the Norton stone works very good - when it's working (see below). The 4k side will provide a fresh, correct bevel (it will not however remove any chips of significance without extensive use). The 8k side leaves a mirror finish that is truly near perfect. Given a working Norton 4k/8k, a loupe/microscope, a good strop, and decent razor to begin with - nothing more is needed to get a great shaving razor. The problem with embedded grit (see below) in the Norton 4k/8k is still being researched.

At this time it seems that some purchasers of the Norton stone will get a working stone, and some will get a defective stone. The defective stones cause severe damage to the precision edge of a straight razor. Either lapping embeds grit into the stone, or the stone comes with embedded grit. Either way the symptom is obvious to the observant person honing a straight razor...despite the stone feeling quite smooth to the touch - when honing (or backhoning) is performed the sensation of hitting little pieces of grit can be felt through the razor. Upon microscopic examination evidence of extreme damage (chipping) will be visible on the edge. A properly working stone will neither provide this sensation, nor cause the chipping damage to the edge. Sometimes this grit can be removed from the stone, other times it cannot. At the time of this writing, Norton customer service is very helpful, and willing to exchange the stones. More information will be posted here as it develops. Please also see the following threads for further details on the Norton embedded grit problem...

"Norton roughness, chips, edge shredding, micro chipping" http://www.straightrazorplace.com/fo...ad.php?t=16338

"Norton Roughness"
http://www.straightrazorplace.com/fo...rton+roughness

"Pitted Norton 4000 water stone"
http://www.straightrazorplace.com/fo...ghlight=pitted

"Pockmarked Norton 4000"
http://www.straightrazorplace.com/fo...ad.php?t=16072

"'feel' of the Norton 8k"
http://www.straightrazorplace.com/fo...redding+ edge

"Norton's shredding my edge"
http://www.straightrazorplace.com/fo...redding+e dge

"My Norton saga continues"
http://www.straightrazorplace.com/fo...highlight=pits

"Norton 8000... has this happened to any of you guys?"
http://www.straightrazorplace.com/fo...ead.php?t=6843



An alternative to the Norton 4k/8k waterstone is to backhone on 1500+ grit wet sandpaper with a marble tile or other flat surface, then finish by honing with a 12k Kitayama or other polishing waterstone. Others might use another waterstone or diamond hone in lieu of the sandpaper technique described.



The reviewer welcomes any feedback.

Is this the first time you've used this stone? A review based on honing one razor does not tell much, nor does a review based on others comments. I would be interested in how you honed the razor on the stone too. How many razors have you honed in the alternative method you described? What kinds? What typical condition are the razors in?

Thanks.

Lynn

Lynn,

The Norton 4k/8k stone tested had approx 60 man hours of honing for this review.

Several honing techniques were utilized on the Norton for this review... hone, backhone, x-pattern, straight strokes, light pressure, no pressure, copious amounts of water, nagura slurry, no slurry, wet sandpaper lapped in many grits/brands, scotchbrite cleaned, nagura stone cleaned, hand cleaning, corner chamfer, corner radius, etc, etc, etc...

The backhoning technique described on 1500 grit to establish a bevel, as crazy as it may sound, works very well. As you say 'less is more' with regards to honing and indeed the strokes on the 1500 grit must be light for best results. Done correctly it leaves very little if any wire edge to remove. It prepares a bevel that the Kitayama (or a working Norton 8k) readily polishes off to perfection. This technique has been used successfully on several razors (Dovo and Henckels), all of them in near new condition.



Thanks for the feedback.

Hi Forzato,

I think if you read the threads you've linked all the way through, most of them reflected newbies having newbie-type challenges with the Norton and working them out with everyone's help. For example here's how things worked out with Rustyblade:

Originally Posted by rustyblade

Thank you gents. I bought some 1500 grit sandpaper today and a glass cutting board to slap the sandpaper to (the underside is smooth whereas the cutting surface is rough). I lapped the stone and the 8000k is smooth as glass. Lets just hope and can get those darn razors sharp now.

Josh and Simon Coull each had truly defective stones that were replaced in the end, but their case was pretty rare. Yours might be the third here; I'm sure Norton will take care of the problem.

I hope your review doesn't dissuade newbies from buying the Norton, or lead them to jump to conclusions about its defectiveness the first time they hit a piece of grit left over from careless lapping, or chip an edge due to an imperfect stroke and improperly chamfered edges.

Hi dylandog,

Indeed I have carefully read through each thread. I have thoroughly attempted every technique described ...and then some.

The intention of the review is most definitely not to unjustly dissuade someone from buying the Norton... it is more to identify the problem (albeit rare), and to suggest some alternatives.

If I am truly the third person to ever get a defective Norton stone - I'd be surprised. It is possible - I'll give you that. As stated Norton customer service is very helpful and I'll post results from the exchanged stone when it's received.

The biggest reason to post the issue is so that we don't lose any newbies as a function of frustration with the Norton... although I am sure that most people will be very satisfied with the stone.

Thanks for helping to clarify bro.

Originally Posted by Forzato

Lynn,

The Norton 4k/8k stone tested had approx 60 man hours of honing for this review.

Several honing techniques were utilized on the Norton for this review... hone, backhone, x-pattern, straight strokes, light pressure, no pressure, copious amounts of water, nagura slurry, no slurry, wet sandpaper lapped in many grits/brands, scotchbrite cleaned, nagura stone cleaned, hand cleaning, corner chamfer, corner radius, etc, etc, etc...

The backhoning technique described on 1500 grit to establish a bevel, as crazy as it may sound, works very well. As you say 'less is more' with regards to honing and indeed the strokes on the 1500 grit must be light for best results. Done correctly it leaves very little if any wire edge to remove. It prepares a bevel that the Kitayama (or a working Norton 8k) readily polishes off to perfection. This technique has been used successfully on several razors (Dovo and Henckels), all of them in near new condition.



Thanks for the feedback.

Dude,

You blew through any chance of credibility with this response. Time to move on.

Lynn

Lynn,

With all due respect, please explain how exactly I blew through it.... which part is so incredulous?

Thanks.

For me it was the fact that there were over 700 combinations of circumstances, but you claimed only 60 hours of testing. I dunno, seems a bit rash.

Originally Posted by Nickelking

For me it was the fact that there were over 700 combinations of circumstances, but you claimed only 60 hours of testing. I dunno, seems a bit rash.

Not to mention the condition of the stone and the razor depicted.

Lynn

I think you have too experienced an audience to talk your way to the "top".