best type of waterstone to sharpen V11 plane blade

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

pgrbff

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2020
Messages
1,026
Reaction score
288
Location
Langhe, Piemonte
I have been given a V11 block plane blade. I use mostly Japanese tools so I'm not sure which type of waterstone best for this steel?
 
It's a steel loaded with chromium carbides - almost nothing else, so anything with alumina will be fine. Aluminum oxide is well harder than chromium carbides That pretty much covers all waterstones, india stones, etc, though india stones leave the abrasive in situ and can get a bit slow for wear resistant steels, and worse, will pin with some steels that hold a large burr, and the pinned bits of metal will notch the edge deeply enough that you won't remove them in later honing steps.

V11 does have double the wear resistance of something like O1 and will hone about half as fast in terms of metal volume removal (kees heiden actually made a machine and proved this), so choosing something fast and then just finishing the tip of the iron is better than trying to get too fine with it or you won't keep ahead of small nicks and things of the like.

What are you working with in terms of stones at this point, and do you have something like a 1k or 2k diamond hone?

if you asked me a productive and quick way to sharpen it, I would say any of the garden variety $20 2 sided steel plate diamond hones on ebay that are advertised as something like 400/1000 combinations, and then follow that with something like autosol, or even 1 micron loose diamonds (about $10 for a decade's worth or more), but enough steeper with the fine honing that you'll be assured of getting all of the edge polished instead of polished with random large grooves remaining. this $30 combination will actually be better than any set of stones that I can think of (and I've had my hands on hundreds, probably halfway to the 4 figures point).
 
Diamond I have Atoma 400, naniwa diamond 800 and 6000. I also have an old coarse (black) DMT but it isn't very flat.
I then have a mix of nano-hone, chosera, hibiki and one Cerax . I have some King stones but I assume they will be too soft?

I also have 60 silicon carbide powder and kanaban.
 
With abrasion-resistant steel blades, the trick is to reduce the amount of steel to abrade. The best way to do this is either a hollow grind or a secondary microbevel. I hollow grind, and hone on Shaptons, Sigmas and Spyderco. All of these do it easy, but no doubt you could use just about any stone if this is what you create ...

UltimateGrindingSharpeningSetUp_html_71b2c2d0.jpg


Regards from Perth

Derek
 
Diamond I have Atoma 400, naniwa diamond 800 and 6000. I also have an old coarse (black) DMT but it isn't very flat.
I then have a mix of nano-hone, chosera, hibiki and one Cerax . I have some King stones but I assume they will be too soft?

I also have 60 silicon carbide powder and kanaban.

You have all you need. I mentioned diamonds only because the wear resistance of the huge chromium carbide volume slows honing more than people think. LV tempers the steel hard, so it doesn't fight you letting go of the burr and the resulting edge is crisp. People confuse that with "fast to hone". It's slower to hone than anything other than vanadium steels, but it does have the nice edge properties.

Anything would actually work with it, though - since it doesn't have carbides harder than alumina and you'd only get too-slow honing if you tried to use only oilstones. Kings would work fine, but their softness and tendency to go out of flat would be exposed by needing to take more strokes on them.

Give what you mentioned, use the two naniwa stones and chase the tip with honing compound or metal polish to chase the small burr that the 6000 will make.

(as derek mentioned - limit the amount of steel you have to hone, but it doesn't have to be extreme - just toss any idea of honing the full bevel, it's not a good choice for that kind of thing).
 
The stones you have bar the king would all work well, I’ve used choseras on more abrasion resistant steels with good results, and diamond cuts anything. The kings would be slow going but work in a pinch- with the other options you have though I’d veer away.
 
I had a very hard time putting a decent edge on my fist PM-V11 blade using oilstones (both man-made & natural, which I'd been using happily for 40 years with any other steels). Using a diamond stone followed by an 8,000 water stone solved the problem for me & got sharpening back to the quick operation it should be. However, I disliked the rapid wear of the first water stone I bought, which seemed to get even softer as it wore down & when it came time to replace it I bought a Shapton pro (on Derek's advice as "the water stone for oilstone die-hards" :) ). It's not quite as fast-cutting as the softer stone, but plenty fast enough & needs re-flattening waay less often....

Cheers,
 
Diamond I have Atoma 400, naniwa diamond 800 and 6000. I also have an old coarse (black) DMT but it isn't very flat.
I then have a mix of nano-hone, chosera, hibiki and one Cerax . I have some King stones but I assume they will be too soft?

I also have 60 silicon carbide powder and kanaban.

I use Cerax (1000 and 6000, sometimes 10000) with my Veritas PM-V11 blades. Tried a few others but didn't like them (NANIWA 3000/8000, Rozsutec Whetstone). Have coarse DMT dimond stone for flatening the stones (except Rozsutec, that can probably destroy it). Tried Cerax 400 but it is not very pleasant. I also learn how to use Tormek with random success but Cerax is what I have the most confidence with.

Of course, it takes some time on 1000 to get the nick out, like 20 minutes session, sometimes two sessions with a break.
 
In my view, the value of thin plane blades, such as those from Stanley or Record, lies with the ease of sharpening, since the steel is thin, and often soft. These are beefed up by a chipbreaker.

Premium plane blades from LN, in their case A2 steel, and in the case at hand, the Veritas PM-V11, were designed for two reasons: added edge longevity (the steel composition) and increased stability (their thickness). Chisels in these steels are the same thickness, and the following principle continues.

When sharpening, the downside of these blades is their thickness. The steel is abrasion-resistant, and they were never intended to be sharpened like a thin Stanley plane blade. One can hone a Stanley across the full thickness. With premium steel blades, such as PM-V11, it is necessary to "thin them" to be like the Stanley. This means either hollow grinding or a micro secondary bevel.

When you get thin steel, even abrasion-resistant steel, the playing ground is levelled to a great degree, and most sharpening media will work. Just some work faster than others. But there is not a lot of difference in the time spent, since there is not much area to hone.

I have two sharpening systems. The one in my workshop is a Shapton Pro 1000 (the best 1000 grit I know), and Sigma 6000 and 13000. I have used Shapton Pro 5000, but find it a dog as it glazes over very quickly, and the Shapton Pro 12000, which is a nice stone, but not as fast as the Sigma 13000. My second system is for travel to wood shows and when I demonstrate at clubs, where water is not likely to be available. This is a worn 600 diamond stone, and Spyderco Medium and Ultra Fine ceramic stones. These need a mere spritz of soapy water to clear the swarf.

Regards from Perth

Derek
 
Last edited:
I think A2 was probably chosen for a different reason - ease in heat treating. the touting of edge life is a nice story, but the condition of the edge in the extra 25% over good O1 is somewhat intolerable.

The challenge to get someone to make good O1 is also there, as LN couldn't keep a contractor who would do it and it's being dropped by a lot of commercial hardening services here for knives. That's boggling, but speaks to the ability to run a business without dealing with steel that warps much at all.

Hocks irons, as a side comment, are good steel, and in a condition that they can be tempered back a point or two and be just as long lasting but not chippy.
 
In my view, the value of thin plane blades, such as those from Stanley or Record, lies with the ease of sharpening, since the steel is thin, and often soft.
Older ones often laminated and hard. Never had one which I'd call "soft"
These are beefed up by a chipbreaker.
Beefed up by the whole blade unit; blade, cap iron, lever cap, frog.
Premium plane blades from LN, in their case A2 steel, and in the case at hand, the Veritas PM-V11, were designed for two reasons:
Designed? I always think of them as just a speculative excursion into retro design with "new" steel as another marketing gimmick.
.....

The downside of these blades is their thickness.
Which is exactly the problem Bailey design solved 100+ years ago
The steel is abrasion-resistant, and they were never intended to be sharpened like a thin Stanley plane blade.
You mean they can't be sharpened easily
 
Last edited:
Designed? I always think of them as just a speculative excursion into retro design.

there's nothing retro about precision ground thick irons. Retro would be laminated, tapered with a hollow back side. Something we probably won't see again.

Record's laminated irons and the early stanley laminated irons (really early) are softer than later stanley irons.

Some of stanley's irons are harder laminated than the really old ones, but the earliest gave a nod toward really easy full hand sharpening. So did the early 1800s and late 1700s irons - they are capable of being harder, but distribution and use of faster stones wasn't universal.

I have no idea why record's "tungsten" whatever irons are softer than stanley's solid irons at the same time. they touted grain size, which is likely an artifact of alloy, but the benefit of very fine grain beyond the level that you can see the difference is lost if it isn't used to improve toughness at same hardness or increase hardness.

It's more likely that the benefit of the steel used by record was that it was easier to heat treat. I do have at least one of those irons here and could reharden it, but it would be a shame to risk it warping since it's not solid steel, and change it from original as it's a near unused record #8 iron.

I have had about half a dozen. All have been softer than a one piece sweetheart era stanley.

This topic is probably over the head of most here, but there is historical context for it that I'm sure dictated the working properties of the irons.
For example, stanley's early-mid 1900s block plane irons are softer than they could've been - a nod toward making an iron suitable for site sharpening, but not doing it by using cheap steel. The later round top irons don't have any such potential to get much better. The current irons in mexico planes are again good, but I haven't patterned the carbides in one. Just noted that while the planes can be crude, the irons are surprisingly good. Better than record laminated, which again may be flipped if record hadn't made them soft.

A thicker iron in modern planes gives the impression that it's more stable in the cut, allows for simpler plane designs or both. What's felt doesn't necessarily translate to what's happening at the point of cut. For example, a LN with the cap set properly will not transmit feel to the user for minor tearout, but a stanley will - the cut result will be the same, except you'll have a distaste for what you feel in the stanley and be more encouraged to fix the issue. Well, people would if they weren't convinced that the problem is that the iron is too thin, the plane is too light or the angle isn't steep enough.
 
I think A2 was probably chosen for a different reason - ease in heat treating. the touting of edge life is a nice story, but the condition of the edge in the extra 25% over good O1 is somewhat intolerable.
David, I don't doubt that you are correct. A2 does not warp, as O1 or W1 will during the heating/cooling process. However, A2 was always touted as a more durable steel, which it is. I think the latter was likely a lucky "accident", but an important one.

Regards from Perth

Derek
 
Last edited:
I've never had any problems with diamond stones, it's sharp enough for me, 3 grits and followed by a strop, not really interested in trying oil or water stones but am sure they'll do the job, I like not having to flatten my stones.
 
...... I like not having to flatten my stones.
Me too but with oil stones. You don't have to flatten them you just have to spread the work over the whole surface. Having a hollowish one is handy for cambering plane irons. I hadn't quite realised that until the one time actually flattened a stone and found it wasn't so useful. Never bothered since.
 
Last edited:
I guess my point was that O1 or any other moderately alloyed steel will last about as long as A2 at the same hardness in a usable state. When I've tested irons, the last 20% of A2's edge life is very uneven for reasons that I don't know. There's a world of what happens with an edge as it rounds (and abrasive loss of metal increases) that differs from one alloy to the next and I only note the outcomes as it's not something I want to try to understand.

Even the knife world isn't that much into it.

LV's O1 is probably the most available in the US, and perhaps hock, though I don't know if hock makes as many different patterns. The trouble with LVs is it's soft and O1 is an alloy that undergoes something called tempering embrittlement pretty low in terms of tempering temperatures, so there's no reward for the iron being soft other than it's a little easier sharpening.

I think V11 is a good choice. I think A2 is covering a problem but it's definitely the case that you can find 61/62 hardness A2 steel everywhere with a little bit more abrasion resistance than A2, and people will compare them to softer O1 or water hardening irons, and also struggle with understanding a good balance of sharpening and work so that they're only sharpening what they need to (and not damage).

George was using A2 in the early-mid 90s at CW and Holtey introduced a plane in the mid 90s or something like that with A2. It was well used in knife circles, so if you asked around at the time, a lot of knife folks would've recommended A2 or D2. Not sure when sprayform and PM D2 would've come along. A2 is on the bubble of steels that would be a lot better in PM form. D2 is far better. V11 wouldn't be usable in regular steel ingot.

I got a lot of suggestions on the blade forums before getting banned for refusing to say that you can't heat treat well in the open atmosphere. All of them were a little less good than things we already use - mostly steels heavy with vanadium and niobium that most people on here wouldn't be able to sharpen, especially if they were at high hardness.
 
I've never had any problems with diamond stones, it's sharp enough for me, 3 grits and followed by a strop, not really interested in trying oil or water stones but am sure they'll do the job, I like not having to flatten my stones.

Diamond stones are fine. Until or unless there's something in a steel that a stone abrasive doesn't cut, the outcome is the same across all of them if the tip finish and geometry is the same.
 
Back
Top