The naniwa ss 3k and 5k are very similar in some respects to the naniwa chosera 3k and 5k inasmuch as you can leave one or the other out of the progression. However, as Lyn says in the youTube comments, you can have them both - its perfectably acceptable and up to the individual. I have both sets of stones, and prefer to use the standard step-wise progression, but that's just me.
Incidentally, very small chips can be removed with the 3k naniwa and even the 5k naniwa can refresh a bevel that is almost but not quite there so you may even do without the 1k hone, but if you have a major job to do (large dings, nibbles, breadknifing (controversial!), etc) then you will almost certainly want a 1k.
One odd thing I heard Lyn say is that the stone is not as abrasive as some, which means that the spine isn't eaten into as much (paraphrased a bit, but that's the essence of it). For the life of me, I can't see that the latter assumption is true. The naniwas appear to be less abrasive than some stones and this shows by how shiny the hone wear on the spine and bevel are compared to some other stones of equal grit, which leave a cloudier or scratchier appearance. This is probably due to density of cutting particles more than anything else. Strange as it may seem, hones which give a less abraded appearance to metal have a higher density of cutting particles and hence more uniformity of scratch mark pattern.
The thing that does not scan is that the spine will be less worn - how can that be true? Goes against the laws of physics. Given that the spine is of the same hardness/temper as the bevel, then metal will be eaten at a constant rate, regardless of the stone. There is no such thing as a 'differential' honing action! The scratchier wear left by another hone might appear worse than the shiny wear left by the naniwa, but that is just an illusion. For the same amount of wear - say to bevel-set - on a naniwa and a different hone of equal grit, the wear will be the same - after all. the spine is subtending the angle held at the bevel. Blade geometry cannot lie.
Lyn appears to be honing a new or newish razor, which would have very little wear on the spine, so one would not expect a huge amount of spine wear, providing the spine is not kinked, anyway.
New/newish razors appear to have a more even temper than older razors, where it is common to find the spine and tang to be of a lower hardness than the blade and therefore softer, so in reality on older razors we find slightly more wear on the spine than in newer razors. When taking honing to very high grits this may well explain the plateau effect you get when the razor refuses to get any sharper. It is, however, something overcome quite easily by taping and refreshing the tape at frequent intervals.
The heel is problematic in older razors too. In new razors the stabiliser peters out before reaching the bevel, but as the razor is honed over time the stabiliser begins to get in the way and you are faced with either honing into it, or regrinding the area to keep it off the hone. In this instance tape helps again by elevating the angle). In very old (or poorly honed) razors you often get a little hollow near the heel (sometimes a hook or spur if the razor is very, very old) which shows that previous honers have canted the razor at an angle to avoid honing into the bevel. No problem with a new razor, but with an 1800s razor you don't want a hook gouging your cheek!
Regards,
Neil
