I need a stone-flattener as well as a coarse diamond stone for general metal repair and I've settled on the Atoma diamond plates. I'm just trying to choose between the 140g or 400g. I am also a hobby woodworker, so the plate would used for flattening chisel backs etc. as well.
Most woodworking authors/ catalogues that mention the Atoma prefer the 400g for stone flattening, but most kitchen knife folks recommend the Atoma 140g. I'm currently steering towards the 400g, reasoning: when I do use it for steel removal, I would prefer to have to work harder than remove deeper scratches. I'm guessing that, for stone flattening, I can't go wrong with either stone. I prefer keeping my tools minimal, so would rather not own both. (Although making a double-sided Atoma plate sounds intriguing, if not rougher on the hands.)
I'm curious: anyone here has purchased either of those two grits and regretted not purchasing the other instead?
Thanks, Tim
Atoma 140 vs 400
- ken123
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 2:53 pm
- Location: Northern California
- Has thanked: 253 times
- Been thanked: 316 times
- Contact:
Re: Atoma 140 vs 400
I'd go for the 140 over the 400. Aggressive at first but calms down fairly quickly.
Ken
Ken
-
- Posts: 183
- Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 2:59 am
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 62 times
-
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 8:54 am
- Location: north Ontario CAN
- Has thanked: 139 times
- Been thanked: 149 times
Re: Atoma 140 vs 400
I also started with the 140. I have since purchased the 4oo replacement sheet which I adhered to the back of the 140 plate. It takes up a lot less space, is easier to transport and saved me some money. It may just be me but I like to use the 400 on my higher grit stones.
The pig is a magical animal. It takes vegetables and turns them into bacon.
-
- Posts: 1855
- Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 2:44 am
- Location: Auckland, New Zealand
- Has thanked: 354 times
- Been thanked: 583 times
Re: Atoma 140 vs 400
Ditto for me here and I haven't regretted it. For stones, I use the 140 for stones up to & including 1k & the 400 for stones above that.jknife wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 8:37 pm I also started with the 140. I have since purchased the 4oo replacement sheet which I adhered to the back of the 140 plate. It takes up a lot less space, is easier to transport and saved me some money. It may just be me but I like to use the 400 on my higher grit stones.
Cheers Grant
Just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean they're not going to get you!!
Just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean they're not going to get you!!
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2021 5:13 pm
Re: Atoma 140 vs 400
Thanks for the input, I'm here to listen.
Anyone use their Atoma for edge repair/ thinning as well as stone flattening? Anyone find the 140 to be too aggressive or create too deep a scratch pattern when used on steel? Does using the Atoma for stone flattening relegate it to that use only, or could it still function as both for me?
Anyone use their Atoma for edge repair/ thinning as well as stone flattening? Anyone find the 140 to be too aggressive or create too deep a scratch pattern when used on steel? Does using the Atoma for stone flattening relegate it to that use only, or could it still function as both for me?
-
- Posts: 662
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:47 pm
- Location: Los Angeles
- Has thanked: 369 times
- Been thanked: 444 times
Re: Atoma 140 vs 400
I use an Atoma 140 regularly for both repair and flattening, and unlike some I use it to flatten relatively high grit stones (6K).
When scratches or relative gentleness really matter a low grit stone may be better than a diamond plate, but that said I have found that with a little extra time I can get the atoma scratches out and end up with a very high polish or kasumi type finish if I want. One thing about the atoma 140 is it can give you a crazy burr very fast, so be careful and check almost with every stroke. But if you're working out a chip I mean you're going to go past the burr anyway.
One more thought, when I'm talking about getting the scratches out I'm assuming you're going to something like a 400 regular stone, then perhaps 1K. Results will vary depending on what your next stone is.
If you're looking for versatile the 140 is the way to go.
When scratches or relative gentleness really matter a low grit stone may be better than a diamond plate, but that said I have found that with a little extra time I can get the atoma scratches out and end up with a very high polish or kasumi type finish if I want. One thing about the atoma 140 is it can give you a crazy burr very fast, so be careful and check almost with every stroke. But if you're working out a chip I mean you're going to go past the burr anyway.
One more thought, when I'm talking about getting the scratches out I'm assuming you're going to something like a 400 regular stone, then perhaps 1K. Results will vary depending on what your next stone is.
If you're looking for versatile the 140 is the way to go.
David
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2021 5:13 pm
Re: Atoma 140 vs 400
For flattening/ low-grit sharpening and stone flattening I've been been getting by with sandpaper on granite, . My lowest grit waterstone has been a 1000g and then I jump up to 4000g. That's worked out ok for me for years, but the Atoma is the first step in upping my sharpening game. I'll likely heed all your advise and go with the 140, thanks