Thread: Atkins Four Hundred. "The Finest on Earth?"

Paul,

I suspect that the softness is intentional, not reflective of some kind of technological limitation. A softer saw would certainly be more easily filed and less taxing on the file. May be that they were considered 'hard enough'.

It is rumored that Disston imported Sheffield crucible steel at first and later developed the ability to successfully make high quality crucible steel some time before the Civil War in the mid to late 1850's. In my readings on the early American iron and steel industry I have however been unable to find any mention of Disston establishing a crucible furnace in that time frame. My saw hardness data, particularly the low variability of No. 12's, lead me to believe that Disston may have imported Sheffield crucible steel throughout the 19th century.

American Iron 1607-1900 by Robert Gordon relates that the Gerard brothers set up the first American crucible furnace in 1832 in Cleveland Ohio with a modicum of success. Various other concerns produced crucible steel well before the Civil War but Gordon tells us that the American steel manufacturers didn't get the process working using local materials until 1863 or so, several years after Disston is reputed to have begun crucible steel manufacture.

The reputation of American made steel was so poor relative to Sheffield manufactures that even though Disston was making steel all of the advertising claimed the company was using Sheffield steel because customers had such a bad opinion of American steel. See Work Sights, Industrial Philadelphia 1890-1950 by Walter Licht.

The only 'first' mentioned for Disston as far as steel manufacturing goes is the installation of the first low frequency electric induction furnace at the turn of the 20th century, see Metallurgy for Non-Metallurgists by ASM. Other on line sources mention 'arc furnace' or 'electric furnace'.

Apologies if I've caused a meandering of your thread, I'll look now for a picture of a saw to post as a gesture of contrition.

Regards,
Rob

Just a quick comment on the handle used for the Four Hundred.

Atkins introduced the "Perfection" pattern and espoused it's virtues for many years. This is an exert from their promotional booklet "Saw Sense" around 1938 in which they are advocating that customers should chose models with the "Perfection" handle, although they continued with the old style handle as well. The old style handle was really just tacked onto the end of the saw plate while the "Perfection" pattern was "let in" or "close coupled."

Atkins Saw Sense 1928-30 color cover_0005.jpgAtkins perfection handle from Saw Sense 1938 approx.jpg

This similar but earlier booklet of approx 1926 is more insistent that the "Perfection" handle is the way to go and implies that mechanics who do not chose this style have not looked hard enough!

Atkins Saw Sense 1926 or earlier gray cover_0005.jpgAtkins Saw Sense 1926 or earlier gray cover_0006.jpg

Before anybody asks about Atkins' "Silver Steel", it would seem that it is marketing hype and a catchy name to lead people to believe that the steel is superior. The "London Spring Steel" with all the variations of "extra" and "double" etc etc captions had been done to death and Atkins came up with a new name: There is no silver in the steel!

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by rob streeper

Paul,

I suspect that the softness is intentional, not reflective of some kind of technological limitation. A softer saw would certainly be more easily filed and less taxing on the file. May be that they were considered 'hard enough'.

It is rumored that Disston imported Sheffield crucible steel at first and later developed the ability to successfully make high quality crucible steel some time before the Civil War in the mid to late 1850's. In my readings on the early American iron and steel industry I have however been unable to find any mention of Disston establishing a crucible furnace in that time frame. My saw hardness data, particularly the low variability of No. 12's, lead me to believe that Disston may have imported Sheffield crucible steel throughout the 19th century.

American Iron 1607-1900 by Robert Gordon relates that the Gerard brothers set up the first American crucible furnace in 1832 in Cleveland Ohio with a modicum of success. Various other concerns produced crucible steel well before the Civil War but Gordon tells us that the American steel manufacturers didn't get the process working using local materials until 1863 or so, several years after Disston is reputed to have begun crucible steel manufacture.

The reputation of American made steel was so poor relative to Sheffield manufactures that even though Disston was making steel all of the advertising claimed the company was using Sheffield steel because customers had such a bad opinion of American steel. See Work Sights, Industrial Philadelphia 1890-1950 by Walter Licht.

The only 'first' mentioned for Disston as far as steel manufacturing goes is the installation of the first low frequency electric induction furnace at the turn of the 20th century, see Metallurgy for Non-Metallurgists by ASM. Other on line sources mention 'arc furnace' or 'electric furnace'.

Apologies if I've caused a meandering of your thread, I'll look now for a picture of a saw to post as a gesture of contrition.

Regards,
Rob

Rob

I think you are correct with the softness of English saws. I have had precious little experience sharpening them, which is often a really good way to practically assess their worth without the equipment you have. I do recall a Robert Sorby (Kangaroo brand) that was very soft to file, but I still managed to break multiple teeth when setting and gave up in disgust. I was most unimpressed. As I have rarely broken teeth during the setting and sharpening process I did blame the saw .

Disston established his crucible furnace in 1855, but as you have said kept really quiet about the fact that some American steel was used for fear of market rejection. His first catalogue was released in 1850 under the Keystone saw works name and his electric arc furnace was established in 1906. This is all according to Erv Shaffer's book "Hand Saw makers of North America." I should mention that while his book is generally excellent, it is not without some mistakes.

It is reprehensible that you should distract us so blatantly and you must in recompense post at least three pictures of exciting hand saws one of which should include "Wonder Woman." (Gal Gadot). Please: No more distractions. Your contrition was appreciated, noted and taken into account during sentencing.

Regards
Paul

Rob

I have had an interesting day surfing the net. See: I've got all the terms now with my new found IT skills. Here is some verification for the dates of Disston's furnaces (1855 for his crucible furnace and 1906 for the electric arc furnace in Lockhart) from one of their Saw and File publications from 1945.



1945 Disston Saw and File Manual (2).jpg Disston Saw Tool 1945 Disston Saw and File manual second page (2).jpg

The pix are slightly blurred but that is how there were originally. Without the cooperation of a TV CSI team to enhance the pix it is the best I can do.

Regards
Paul

Edit: Despite my earlier claims I could do nothing I think I have been able to improve the clarity. However I stress that, I think, because I have had huge problems loading the pix and even getting on to the Forum.

Paul.
A fantastic thread well done.
An as I have nothing intelligent to say, I will keep my mouth shut and try to absorb as much as possible.
But thank you for putting together another great thread.
Us mere mortals are in orrrrr.

Cheers Matt

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

IT skills

Adjective correct. The noun may need some qualification.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

The pix are slightly blurred

...standby and I'll see what I can do....

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

...standby and I'll see what I can do....

Well I can't do nuffink. I put them into Photoshop where I was going to see what the Unsharp Mask would do, but those images are immune to anything in PS (even "select")

Belay that, I may have cracked it....

What's this like?

1945 Disston Saw and File Manual.jpg

Disston Saw Tool 1945 Disston Saw and File manual second page.jpg

From my iPhone,
On my death bed because I've got man flu, and may not make it through the night.
Still blurry when I click on a pic and expand it up.
Saying that I'm on a phone screen
Not a computer screen.

Cheers Matt

A slight cockup with the canvas size here....but maybe an improvement?

1945 Disston Saw and File Manual.jpg

Disston Saw Tool 1945 Disston Saw and File manual second page.jpg

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

....What's this like? ............

Better.

Sometimes you can make a B&W image 'sharper' by simply cranking up the contrast......

Cheers,

I'm still getting the same



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Paul and Brett,

Thanks for the posts and picture enhancements. May I use them in a thread more oriented to the development of the 19th and early 20th century iron and steel industries I'm working up?

I have doubts about Disston's claims, none of the other sources I've read to date repeat them. The Disston PR sounds in many ways like the Hero of Socialist Labor stories about having invented or discovered or created everything good and wholesome in the world.

Regards,
Rob

From a non-data-based but user-substantiated viewpoint, the Disston 12 is the finest saw I've used. But I like the disston 7, Groves carpenter saw (harder to find, but sometimes inexpensive if you manage to find them off of ebay) and Woodrough & McParlins better than Atkins, and all about equally well. Also like the D-8s for rip work as well as anything. All of the disstons have been reliably similar in hardness, and the W&McP seem similar with one rip saw seeming just a little bit harder.

I've had an atkins 54 (the only saw I actually liked - at least I think it was, I sold it to someone on here through ebay - it was patterned after the Disston 7 style IIRC, which is more or less an English style saw). Every saw that I've had from atkins (including one that cost me a hundred bucks unrestored) other than that one has been unimpressive in terms of stiffness, to the point that I can't really pay attention to much else. In heavy use, they will start to buckle earlier, despite feeling similar under the file, and my resolution to that (at some point, I may hammer them) has been to just leave them in the till.

The groves carpenter rip saw that I have is the equal of any of my disstons, and a delight to use. The orientation of it makes it just right in terms of push forward vs. push down, it's stiff, and it's evenly hardened from end to end and operates well on relatively low set. Low set on the atkins, or binding wood and you're at risk of buckling the saw very unexpectedly. The later atkins saws that I've had (like 1940s/1950s) have been OK (just OK, not great)(, but they are light feeling with blocky handles. I've never kept one long enough to form much of an opinion. I like a rip saw with a little bit more weight in the plate than those saws, which weren't that tall at the toe when new, and not at the heel, either.

I've never had much luck digging up older simonds saws with low use.

If the other groves saws are like mine, though, they could give anyone a run for the money. I've had other english saws (old S&J saws, etc), but sometimes they have a hard spot surprise at one end or another. If one is sharpened in a big frown, it can be chancey that they're hard at the ends.