Another whats under the stone post.

[Stewie Simpson]

Received this 2nd hand natural sharpening stone from the U.K this morning.

Under all that old oil and grime there are features that indicate its most likely crystaline novaculite in structure, an oil stone, either Washita or Arkansas.



The same stone after being flattened reveals much more of the stones natural features.



During the flattening process, indications are, its a hard stone, slow slurry releasing, most likely pointing to its identity as being Arkansas.

To validate that fact, requires some mathematics to work out the stones specific gravity. (SG)

Weight of the stone = 515 grams.

Mass ( 20.1 cm x 4.7cm x 2.3cm) = 217.28 cm3

515/ 217.28 = 2.37 g/cm3

SG = 2.37.

Using the following site as a reference; Stone Grades 101 , It identifies the stone as being within the Hard Arkansas range of 2.30 - 2.45 SG / 800 - 1000 grit.

Stewie;

[Stewie Simpson]

A few comments on the sharpening box that the stone was made for. Its stamped J.SMITH. The wood chosen looks to be English Rosewood so that was good choice. The mortising out was done to a high standard using a brace and bit, followed by chiseling out of the waste, and further refined by the use of a router plane to true the depth of the mortise floors, (missing the spacer blocks). A beveled edge was then applied to the top lid of the box, as well as the outer edges of the internal mating surfaces. Dowel feet were recessed under the base of the box, and then glued and trimmed off to a 1/8" elevation. The only criticism of J.SMITH, is that he could have taken a little more care to avoid, or address the tear out that's quite evident on the top primary surface of the lid. That being the show piece of the box itself. Was J.SMITH a Carpenter, a Joiner, a Carpenter and Joiner, or a Cabinet Maker. The passing of time will likely suggest we will never find out.

Stewie;

[Jim Koepke]

The only criticism of J.SMITH, is that he could have taken a little more care to avoid, or address the tear out that's quite evident on the top primary surface of the lid.

Was the box actually made by J.Smith?

Was there possibly a label on top of the box? Could it being pulled off caused tear out?

Looks like a nice stone.

jtk

[Stewie Simpson]

Hi Jim; both box halves have the hammer impression stamp of J.SMITH on the end grain. I am assuming from past practice that J.SMITH was the likely person that made the box to house that stone. Noting the type and hardness of the wood used, and the localised tear out, its more than likely some reverse grain was encountered at the time the box was made.

Stewie;

[Stewie Simpson]

http://www.danswhetstone.com/stone_grades_101.htm

The reference relied upon to ascertain the grit rating of this stone was based on the (ANSI) US. Fed Gov. Standard. Hopefully Patrick can chime in on the equation needed to allow a comparative analysis with (JIS) used for Japanese Natural Stones.

Stewie;

[Stewie Simpson]

the following is a conversion chart. https://www.fine-tools.com/G10019.html

[Pat Barry]

Stewie, can you please upload the images directly instead of linking through Photobucket? Reason for asking is that, I went to look at some of your old threads / posts regarding saw making and filing and the images have disappeared. It would be so much better if these images were stored on this website directly because they would always be here. Thanks

[Stewie Simpson]

Pat; that's because I deleted all of those saw making photo's from my photobucket account.

Stewie;

[Pat Barry]

Pat; that's because I deleted all of those saw making photo's from my photobucket account.

Stewie;

That's why I'm asking you to not use the bucket and to post them directly here.

[Stew Denton]

Stewie,

Nice stone and good post. Thanks for the links, as I learned a bit about stones.

Thanks again and regards,

Stew

[Stewie Simpson]

Thanks Stew; good to hear someone took notice.

Stewie;

[Stewie Simpson]

Pat; I still have enough saw plate, brass back, and saw bolts in my workshop to make a further 20 backsaws in the future if I so please. But I have to have the question the value in providing future threads including photo's on the critical steps of making your own backsaws. My experience from a previous time, was the vast majority of forum members (not restricted this site only), had little interest in following my lead, and from general feedback received, showed a preference to purchase, rather than make their own saws. If the ongoing interest lies within learning more about how to resharpen and maintain your handsaws, that's something quite different. As far as my personal choice of using photobucket to load my from photo's from, my preference lies within having some control over the storage of my photo's, rather than leave it to the likes of a 2nd entity, or public domain to control their future. It wasn't that long ago, and still is a regular occurrence on some online forums, that any thread over 12 months old, is automatically deleted from the system to manage data storage.

regards Stewie;

[Warren Mickley]

The stone looks more like a soft Arkansas or Washita to me. Oil soaked stones may weigh a little more than raw stones.

A hard Arkansas stone is not really equivalent to an 800 or 1000 grit water stone. If you expect the Arkansas to cut as fast as a 1000 grit stone you could be disappointed. And if you expect the 1000 grit stone to polish as nicely as an Arkansas stone you could be quite disappointed also.

[Mel Fulks]

Some of the info on Washita stones from about 1900 says the ideal ones were About 2.1 SG. Ideal meaning coarse and fast cutting. It took a while for me to realize that was what workmen were looking for. Practical fast edge. Different sources have competing views of what is a hard Ark, but 2.6 SG is what I've seen most often.

[Stewie Simpson]

The stone looks more like a soft Arkansas or Washita to me. Oil soaked stones may weigh a little more than raw stones.

A hard Arkansas stone is not really equivalent to an 800 or 1000 grit water stone. If you expect the Arkansas to cut as fast as a 1000 grit stone you could be disappointed. And if you expect the 1000 grit stone to polish as nicely as an Arkansas stone you could be quite disappointed also.

Warren; appreciate your feedback, but I applied a given process of elimination, above the look of stone to ascertain its real identity. I agree with your comments on comparing 1 stone to the performance of another based on grit rating. That's why I expressed some interest in comparing the ANSI Standard to the JIS Standard. I was rather disappointed with the conversion chart that I posted, as I personally think both ANSI and JIS both fail in comparison to the methodology used by sellers of these natural stones. Japanese nat stones in particular. I haven't had the opportunity to personally test this stone out on steel edge to gain my own impression of the stones working grit, but I would not be surprised if I were to delegate a range much closer to the 8k mark.

regards Stewie;