Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 48
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,095

    Default

    The story continues. It seems that almost everybody was in on the act. CE Jenning had a lookalike too. I think it was even catalogued as a No.12. How blatant is that?

    C E Jennings No.12 plate.jpgC E Jennings No.12.jpg

    "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."

    Somewhere just recently I saw another "No.12" with a Warranted Superior medallion and stupidly I didn't save it. Do you think I can find it now?

    The Stiletto in an earlier post had a Warranted Superior medallion. I am kicking myself now that I didn't follow it up.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  2. # ADS
    Google Adsense Advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Age
    2010
    Posts
    Many





     
  3. #17
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,357

    Default

    Paul; the top horn on that saw handle has a wonderful shape to it.

    When it is not a No.12-jennings-12-jpg

  4. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,095

    Default

    Stewie

    You are quite right.

    There is just a touch more curvature that lends extra elegance. I quickly flicked back to the other saws to compare. Only the early Disston No.12 (post #16) exhibits the same look. Perhaps they are both examples of the truly hand crafted era, although I have to point out my knowledge of Jennings is poor.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  5. #19
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,357

    Default

    Paul; the twin hounds tooth on the top and bottom locations of the handle is something you dont see very often. It certainly adds a touch of class to the handles overall presentation.

  6. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,095

    Default

    I thought folk art had reached rock bottom when I saw this one.

    bastardised No.12.jpg

    I was truly outraged, but a plan formulated in my mind. Look at the handle.

    bastardised No.12 distressed handle.jpg

    The top horn has lost a bit of length, but could be repaired. The part that I call the flat, and since receiving Simon Barley's book believe it may be called the "boss," looks like it has been distressed with a meat tenderiser, but again I could be philosophical about that too.

    But this is the killer:

    bastardised No.12 toe.jpg

    There's no way I can rectify those two cracks. So I won't be rescuing this one after all. Also I just noticed that it is missing the bead and nib so it is probably a cut down panel saw. All academic now anyway.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  7. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,095

    Default

    When you start looking for the No.12 lookalikes they seem to abound.

    Woodrough McParlin's No.12

    P1000771.jpg

    Harvey Peace's No.60 (which I cannot get to orientate properly)

    P1000772.jpg

    and of course Richardson's No.9

    P1000773.JPG

    Now I have mentioned Richardson before and Stewie picked up on the elegance of the handle so why have I mentioned it again?

    I copied these saws out of a reprinted 1895 catalogue for The National Saw Co. It was a marketing group comprising four manufacturers: Richardson, Woodrough McParlin, Harvey Peace and Wheeler Madden & Clemson. The link being that these four companies had been acquired by the voracious Disston concern, but continued to produce saws under their own names. So it was unsurprising that this handle was used by three of the four companies. I think Wheeler Madden and Clemson missed out because that brand already had their very distinctive Holden pattern handle which was used on at least fourteen of their models with varying degrees of embellishment or lack of it.

    However, Atkins were not a member of the inner circle, but it did not prevent them unleashing their No.64 (this is from a 1906 catalog):

    Atkins No.64 1906 Catalogue.jpg



    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  8. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    6,974

    Default

    [emoji106]

  9. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    I wonder if the steel used by the imitators was as different from the run-o-the-mill saws of their respective lines as the Disston No. 12 steel was?
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  10. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,095

    Default

    Thanks Matt for the orientation. I must get you show me how you do that if you manage to get up here for the GTG (when a date is set )

    Rob

    The question of steel is a good one. I think it is clear that the handle pattern was very likely shared. Probably not so with the steel as each enterprise must have had it's own facilities. Although the four manufacturers were lumped together for marketing purposes I don't know if they operated from their original premises. I will have look into were they were located: Unless one of the super sleuths beats me to it .

    I am away at the moment and don't have the catalogue with me, but I don't think the lookalikes were the top models in the respective ranges. For that matter Disston's own No.12 was not the flagship model either once into the early part of the 20th century.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  11. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    At the risk of hijacking your thread a little I'll add that I think that Disston made the No. 12 saws differently. It wasn't just polishing or some other cosmetic application, the steel of the No 12's is nearly three times more consistent in hardness than are all of their other saws. I don't know if this observation is due to differences in feed stock or differences in processing. As Disston used imported steel early on I wouldn't be surprised if that practice continued for the steel used to make No. 12's, it was advertised as such after all. In the alternative I've been able to produce a blade that shows a very similar decrease in variability by heat treatment and an increase in hardness that is likewise.
    I'm going to extend my studies of hardness to include the No 12 look-alikes as well as adding some British makers to determine how their products compare to those of the American makers currently in my database. The only British saw I've tested was a Footprint and it was on the soft side.
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  12. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,095

    Default

    Rob

    Disston in their literature always stated that only the very best saw plates were reserved for the No.12s. I don't know at what point this selection took place: possibly very early in the process even before the shape was stamped out. It would certainly be interesting to see how other saws compared both from the same stable and also the competitors.

    Amongst the British manufacturers Spear and Jackson probably occupies a similar status to Disston.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  13. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Wonthaggi
    Posts
    256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bushmiller View Post
    Rob

    Disston in their literature always stated that only the very best saw plates were reserved for the No.12s. I don't know at what point this selection took place: possibly very early in the process even before the shape was stamped out. It would certainly be interesting to see how other saws compared both from the same stable and also the competitors.

    Amongst the British manufacturers Spear and Jackson probably occupies a similar status to Disston.

    Regards
    Paul
    May be a result of the (non) quality end game.

    Try to sell an S&J saw. Any S&J saw.

    Good luck.

    And yet relatively modern Disstons with dubious white metal medallions still draw sales.

  14. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

    Try to sell an S&J saw. Any S&J saw.
    Good to know, thanks. Any idea why S&J's don't sell well? The prices on eBay seem to be pretty robust.
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  15. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,095

    Default

    I have several S & Js to restore, but have not had any experience of selling as yet. I suppose even more so than Disston, for example, they were around for a very long time so some models would be more desireable than others. In particular the earlier models would be more collectable than late examples and may or may not be better made.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  16. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Wonthaggi
    Posts
    256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rob streeper View Post
    Good to know, thanks. Any idea why S&J's don't sell well? The prices on eBay seem to be pretty robust.
    My experience has been that S&J are much harder to sell, and draw around one third to half the sale value of a broadly equivalent Disston.

    I'd guess that part of that is that among the population who have a limited level of interest, Disston is almost synonymous with vintage hand saw. Kind of like the photocopier is a Xerox machine.

    The other part is that when the whole hand tool market went into quality decline, S&J seem to have embraced the race to the bottom with enthusiasm, and that mud still sticks even to their older saws.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •