Thread: Question regarding PHIGs

When it comes to PHIGs or C12Ks or whatever you like to call them, is it the hard ones or the soft one that make better finishers? I recently bought one because it was such a good deal, and it's super hard. About the only way to raise any kind of slurry is with the DMT 325; the slurry stone is virtually worthless. I decided to lap mine earlier tonight, and I used the 325 and then lapped it against a Norton 1K. It raised a hell of a mud on the 1k, but it was 1k mud. I'm not sure that the lapping did much to the PHIG. Just wondering what everyone else's experiences have been.

I recently bought a PHIG, lapped it with a DMT 325. It took a little while. Grid lined it with a pencil, then lapped it.
Mine appears to be super hard. Slurried it with a 325. Fairly easy to slurry. I recently used it to freshen up two of my rotation razors. Each took approx. 175 strokes to give me a smooth and close shave. It appears to be relatively hard to over hone on a PHIG. I am very happy with mine.

I like to use mine after the coticule. I give the razor 50 laps with very light pressure, flip the hone and finish with around 50 slow, careful laps with only the weight of the razor. It's a fine finisher in my book.

The hardness seems to be the rule. Certainly there's alot of variation, but mine and those of a couple other guys I spoke with are good at giving keenness, but not smoothness. I'd not heard of using one after a coti, but i'll let someone else argue with what works.

I have two and both offers smooth edges, but one of them is quite a bit finer than the other and finer than the three coticules I've used. A good PHIG is comparable with a good Thuringian IMO.

Most of them are hard. If you would like to raise slurry with the slurry stone, if its rectangular, don't use the flat sides, lap it with the angle or edge or whatever it's called between them. This way it will raise slurry (you might find a few scratches on the surface of the stone this way but no big deal, and the stone remains marble like shiny). There is also a softer variety of this stone, but I don't much about them.

Originally Posted by Blix

A good PHIG is comparable with a good Thuringian IMO.

+1...

I have owned a few vintage Thuringians, and a number of PHIGs... The PHIG that I am down to is finer than any of the thuringians I have ever had....

Originally Posted by HNSB

+1...

I have owned a few vintage Thuringians, and a number of PHIGs... The PHIG that I am down to is finer than any of the thuringians I have ever had....

I have never uses a Thuringian but my C12k is a great finisher, very hard ( a bit slow but no worries as a finisher) with a crispy sharp edge. I prefer the finished edge smoother but it's a great stone. especially for the money. I just use mine with water.

Originally Posted by pinklather

The hardness seems to be the rule. Certainly there's alot of variation, but mine and those of a couple other guys I spoke with are good at giving keenness, but not smoothness. I'd not heard of using one after a coti, but i'll let someone else argue with what works.

Perhaps I should try using a coticule on water AFTER the C12. that might mellow the keenness without losing the sharpness

also, I hate the PHIG designation as it is derogatory. No one knows the actual grit for any natural stone, why the prejudice against this one?

I like my Chi-Com stone. With a slurry and a tiny bit of chrome-ox, it's a wonderful but slow finisher.