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

Originally Posted by IanW

Oi Matt, maybe it's because of that third rum you downed to keep warm?

I survived the night and have been put out to work.
With no rum !!!

I have been able to improve the quality of the Disston pix on the previous page so although they are far from ideal they are a little clearer. Even Matt may be able to read them, if he stays off the rum. (It's OK for medicinal purposes ).

Something I should emphasise is that I started this thread with a question mark in the title and I am more than happy for people to challenge the statement. My contention is that Atkins maintained that it was the best, but so did Disston and Simonds with their top of the line models. Just because they say it is so does not make it so. All I have done is put the Atkins case forward and this is something I can do as, irrespective of whether it is the best, it is a handsome saw of high quality.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

I have been able to improve the quality of the Disston pix on the previous page so although they are far from ideal they are a little clearer. Even Matt may be able to read them, if he stays off the rum. (It's OK for medicinal purposes ).

Something I should emphasise is that I started this thread with a question mark in the title and I am more than happy for people to challenge the statement. My contention is that Atkins maintained that it was the best, but so did Disston and Simonds with their top of the line models. Just because they say it is so does not make it so. All I have done is put the Atkins case forward and this is something I can do as, irrespective of whether it is the best, it is a handsome saw of high quality.

Hi Paul

In discussions of "best" how do you control for sharpness and wood type -- hard vs soft -- and species -- Aussie eucalypt vs North American maple ?

as I noted above, in the late 19th century the US was awash with immigrants -- the library of Congress estimates that around 25 million Europeans entered the US between 1880 and 1930.
most of these immigrants would have been buying whatever saws they could afford to build their "american dream"

Originally Posted by rob streeper

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

Rob

Fine from my perspective. They are in the public arena anyway. This is a link given to me by Hiroller some while back for the International Tool Library:

https://archive.org/details/internat...cataloglibrary

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by D.W.

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.

D.W.

If you like Disstons and in particular the No.12 and No.7 (Henry's original saw) I'm not surprised you like Woodrough & McParlin. The chances are that any of their saws you use were made under the Disston ownership. Disston acquired Richardson and Harvey Peace in 1890 and Woodrough & McParlin and Wheeler Madden & Clemson in 1893. The four companies were amalgamated under the National Saw Company in 1895, Three of the companies (WMC is the exception) have a saw that looks for all the world like a Disston No.12.

Woodrough & McParlin No.12
Harvey Peace No.60
Richardson No.9

More information for you in this thread:

When it is not a No.12

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by ian

Hi Paul

In discussions of "best" how do you control for sharpness and wood type -- hard vs soft -- and species -- Aussie eucalypt vs North American maple ?

as I noted above, in the late 19th century the US was awash with immigrants -- the library of Congress estimates that around 25 million Europeans entered the US between 1880 and 1930.
most of these immigrants would have been buying whatever saws they could afford to build their "american dream"

Ian

It is impossible for me to evaluate anything objectively and to some extent it was impossible for saw manufacturers to produce one saw to cut all timbers. If I can find it quickly I will add an extract from one of the "guides" where the manufacturer suggests the user sharpens the saw to suit his own work. There were some attempts to create an all purpose saw: Disston had their D17 (The Double Duty saw) and Atkins had their Universal saws (Tripple Duty). They were both designed to crosscut and rip. I sharpened and tried a D17. It worked surprisingly well. However I generally am not keen on compromises. Rip saws for with the grain: Crosscut saw across the grain. As far as hard and soft woods are concerned you can make a saw cut faster by increasing the fleam, but will it last? Soft woods tend to require more set to the teeth and green timber certainly requires more set.

Some while back I realised I had five Disston D-23 saws all at 8ppi and I intended to sharpen each a slightly different way. I have done this but have not really had an opportunity to test this with an independent group of woodworkers across a range of timbers, although a couple of people have briefly had a go at them.

P1030571.JPGP1030575.JPG

Although they are all very similar, they are not identical, but as close as I am likely to get.

Regards
Paul

Rob, here is the second image with the proper canvas size.

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

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Rob, here is the second image with the proper canvas size.

Heck! My reign at the top of the Internet Technology chain was pretty short lived: Nearly as good as Steve Smith. Ooooh, I hope Fence Furniture didn't cheat. No tampering with the canvas allowed in this arena. I will look for scrub marks at the edges.

Regards
Paul

Don't be concerned....somebody with proper Photoshop skills could do a better job than I did. I am very much just a part-timer.

Something to which I had meant to draw attention (it fell outside that three second attention span) was the difference in medallions between the early and late. I went looking for some Atkins saw and to my surprise the last Atkins on the hook was another 400.There were in fact two surprises. Firstly that I had another and secondly the etch. It seems that the majority of Atkins etches fade away, but this had remained and had a little story to tell. Apologies for the state of the saw as it has had no work done on it at all.


P1030744 (Medium).JPG

The handle is similar, actually I think it is identical,to the 50s saw I first posted:
P1030745 (Medium).JPG

Here are the three together with the newest on the left and the earliest on the right:
P1030746.jpg

This indicates that the saw was made under the Borg Warner ownership which took place in 1952.

P1030743 (Medium).JPG

I had forgotten that Borg Warner owned Atkins before Nicholson bought it in 1966. The etch is much less flowery with plain type and less hype compared to the other two saws:

P1030753 (Medium).JPG

and the oldest one:
P1030754 (Medium).JPG



Regards
Paul

Back to the original intent of digging deep into the saw stocks and the medallions. Like with Disston, as time went by, the medallions for Atkins became less impressive and what I describe as more naive. Simonds were not guilty of this transgression as they had stopped making hand saws before some clown said they had to be dumbed down. Having said that, their last medallion was less fussy, but at least the definition was good. The definition on Atkins saws became poor and they began to look as if they had been farmed out to the local kindergarten. See below the medallion used on the two later saws and then the early saw:

P1030749 (Medium).JPGP1030750 (Medium).JPG

Here are some other medallions for comparison. The two lower handles were originally nickel plated brass and the top left handle was just brass The lower handle is also from a slightly later era as it does not have the sunken medallion. I really like the sunken style and it is reminiscent of the early Disstons before 1878:

P1030756 (Medium).JPG

I think the plain brass looks better than the nickel plated. It just looks less brassy .

One day I am going to get to the bottom of when the floral embossing was used and when the wheat carving was prevalent. However that is irrelevant for the 400 as it was not carved at all.



Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

I think the plain brass looks better than the nickel plated. It just looks less brassy .

It looks more brassy, which is why we both like it. Nickel is more or less like any other silver coloured metal. Brass is brass. Dunno why they would bother nickel plating brass...

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

P1030744 (Medium).JPG


P1030746.jpg

Now I just want to point out that to those of you who think Paul may have the teensiest obsession with saw collecting, that ALL of these saws are for sale, even though you may think that the prices on offer are designed for them never to sell.....

Hey ahhhh, have you got this collection documented in a spreadsheet? If not, I could whip one up for you, and I PROMISE I wouldn't reveal the contents to anyone




for less than 500 bucks.

I had to look up "obsession." Still not sure I have gathered the full meaning. As far as I can make out it seems to involve rescuing artifacts from the tip.

Regards
Paul