Woodworking is such a small matter.
We take little pieces
Of what robes mountains and valleys
Then reconnect them in ways so naive.

Yet in making things
The joy of choosing is large.
Maple or cherry?
More or less curved?

Not only the trees
And us
But also from God,
Is this gift of freedom.

My new, new (ugh) favorite fine finishing stone, the Suehiro Gokumyo, is a real thoroughbred. Nominally 20,000 grit/0.5 µ with a tight distribution of particle size, it can produce magnificently sharp, clean edges.

This is a very hard stone in all respects. A hard, tough binder makes it extremely wear resistant, so it retains a flat surface very well and requires little maintenance. It is virtually non-porous, so no soaking is required – just splash and go.

When first using the Gokumyo, do not expect the genial feel of a Chosera 10K or a soft waterstone. The hard feel of this stone under the steel is initially formidable. However, once you tune in to just how awesomely fast and smooth it is removing steel and adjust your sense of feedback, it becomes an efficient joy to use. Nonetheless, to get the most out of it, you do need good sharpening skills.

The Gukomyo comes with a 1K/3K nagura but I prefer my shop-made 1200-grit diamond nagura to quickly enhance feel and performance. I have not encountered the grabbing or stiction that many of the Shapton stones tend to produce, and one does not need to baby this stone like the Chosera 10K.

Having worked with this stone for several months now, it produces great edges in all the main steels in my shop – ­A-2, O-1, and Japanese blue and white. I transition from the 8000/3µ DMT Dia-Sharp diamond stone, used with a light touch, to the 20K Gokumyo. True, that is a sizable leap but it works, and it minimizes the number of stones and speeds the process.

The Gukomyo 20K is discussed fairly widely on the internet among straight razor aficionados but has not received much attention from woodworkers. The best and least expensive source for Suehiro Gukomyo finishing stones is Tools From Japan, which is actually based in Japan. Proprietor Stu Tierney is tremendously knowledgeable and generously helpful. [This review is unsolicited and uncompensated.] Yes, this is an expensive connoisseur’s stone but at 20mm thick and so wear resistant, it should last an extremely long time.

With this and the transition to diamond stones, the revolving door of sharpening stones in my shop seems to have thankfully reached an end.

By the way, anyone want to buy some used Shapton glass stones or other sharpening gear at a nice price? (Please send me an mail.)

Sharpening tools should integrate into a logical system. Here is how and why I have revamped my system to use diamond stones as the workhorses.

The tools

The system uses three DMT Dia-Sharp 8″ x 3″ continuous surface diamond stones, a very fine ceramic finishing stone (about 1/2µ), and the Tormek 10″ grinding wheel. The diamond stones are: 45µ (325 mesh), 9µ (1200 mesh), and 3µ (8000 mesh).

At this size, these diamond stones fit in the same holding device as most waterstones and provide enough length to accommodate a honing guide, if desired. I measured the flatness of each using a Starrett straightedge to be better than 0.0005″ (half a thou) over the whole surface.

Diamond stones cut wonderfully fast, require minimal maintenance, and last a long time. Compared with coarse and medium waterstones, they create less mess, and minimize the chance of transferring grit from stone to stone via the blade or a honing guide.

The processes

A tool makes only infrequent trips to the Tormek to reconstruct the primary bevel. The 10″-diameter grinding wheel creates a mild hollow. I usually grind barely out to the edge or just short of it. Next, I clean up the primary bevel with the 9µ/1200 diamond stone by creating small flats on both ends of the hollow, and sometimes use it to start the secondary bevel (e.g. to start a slight camber). Then I use the 3µ/8000 diamond stone to form the secondary bevel, and finally, the 1/2µ ceramic stone with my diamond nagura to bring it to an exquisite edge.

The 45µ/325 diamond stone supplements the Tormek, such as for forming the primary bevel on certain awkward or small tools, or for adjusting a large camber.

For resharpening on the secondary bevel, which is what we are doing most of the time, I use the finest stone I can, based on how dull the edge is. The idea is to strike an efficient balance that avoids spending too much time on the finer stones while minimizing the depth of the initial scratches that later must be removed.

Thus, if just a bit of touch up is needed, the ceramic finishing stone alone may suffice. More often, I’ll start with the 8K diamond, or, if the edge is quite dull, the 1200 diamond, and work down from there.

When working on the secondary bevel, it is important to use a light touch on the diamond stones. I back off any remaining burr or use the “ruler trick” only on the ceramic finishing stone to preserve the polish on the back of the tool.

The key to this system is that diamond stones comprise the literally central position in the process where their speed and responsiveness quickly get the edge ready for the “money” stone – the finest stone.

For the most critical edges, such as a preparing a smoothing plane blade for the finest work, I finish off the edge by stropping it on leather charged with diamond paste down to 1/8µ, perhaps just to make me feel better.

Though these are my usual processes, the great speed of the diamond stones makes it easy to improvise steps to accommodate different situations such as edge nicks, different steels, edge reshaping, etc.

Why these three grits of diamond stones?

I chose these stones (45µ, 9µ, and 3µ) empirically by experimenting with small stones, basing my judgments on sharpening efficiency and edge performance. The key point is that this set of stones works well for me as a system.

Factors in sharpening stone performance are numerous and complex; grit size is only one of them. A diamond stone performs quite differently than a waterstone of the same nominal grit, so using the same numbers for choosing a series of each type of stone would make little sense. Trial and observation work best.

This set of stones yields for me an efficient balance between minimizing the number of stones and minimizing time. I can maintain proper edge geometry, and get very good responsiveness and feel of the steel on the stones at each stage of sharpening. Overall, the increments in grits seem just about right.

Such choices are certainly subject to personal preferences. For example, many woodworkers may prefer the 8K diamond to be the final stone and finish off the edge with some stropping, or prefer to use larger or smaller increments in grit size.