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

Hi Paul,

As far as Atkins goes this is the data I have.

Historical hardness survey of Disston saws 041418a_Page_53.jpg

Atkins saws were a little bit softer than the Disston Golden Era saws but a little harder than the average Disston saw. The bigger difference is the variability in the hardness of the steel.

As far as the British manufacturers my data is a lot thinner but all of the saws are softer than the Disstons. Harvey Peace and Geo. Bishop are also a relatively soft lines of saws that are comparable to the upper end of British manufacturers.

Historical hardness survey of Disston saws 041418a_Page_61.jpg

How much these differences in hardness mean for usability is unknown. Clearly the relatively soft British saws work well so I suppose it's a matter of threshold vs. window.

Thanks for the data Rob.

While not absolutely definitive, it clearly points to a general trend. Your point regarding usability is very pertinent. I would draw an analogy with automobiles where the fastest car is not necessarily the best car. The timber used in the UK may have been well suited to their style of saw for example. We know that the super hard JP saws have a difficult time used on some of the very hard Australian timbers.

Regards
Paul

It seems the Diamond Edge saws, which seem to be the brand of the Norvell-Shapleigh hardware Company, had a saw that was approaching the price of Atkins' 400.

1910 Diamond edge 2[14799].jpg

The model they refer to as the "Double Diamond" sold for $42/doz in 1910. They had a mahogany handle. Only this model had the twin DE etch. Who made it? Don't know. Initially I thought Atkins, but the handle is more angular than Atkins saws or indeed either of Disston and Simonds, although that doesn't rule them out.

Regards
Paul

Quoting from the blurb in the ad. - Double-diamond saws "are highly tempered, but easy to file & set"...

Well they would be, wouldn't they, if highly tempered? Seems like people have been confusing 'hardening' and 'tempering' for a long time.....

Cheers,

Ian

Well spotted. Also supports my supposition they had the saws made for them by a specialist saw maker or they would not have made such an error. I also wondered how the saw plate could be both highly polished and the colour it is?



Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

I also wondered how the saw plate could be both highly polished and the colour it is?

If it was a photograph, then a highly polished surface will look dark if what it is reflecting is not lit (or is dark coloured). Perhaps they think that illustration suggest highly polished?

Brett

You may be right and saws can be really difficult to photograph because of reflection, but I have the benefit of a little more information. These next three advertisements are for saws further down the price range and they have a similar look. Several of the saws refer to a polished blade. It could be a artist's impression instead of a photograph.

Sorry.Pix will appear at the foot as thumbnails. I will edit tomorrow when back home.

1910 Diamond edge 3.jpg1910 Diamond edge 4.jpg1910 Diamond edge.jpg

Ok pix in their rightful place now.



Regards
Paul

Yes they are definitely impressions/illustrations - I was just saying what happens with a pic. I think they are trying to show the glossiness with all those stripes of different tones.

So the trick to photographing shiny metallic objects (or anything shiny, not just metal) is to make the camera see something white or pale grey reflected in it. A sheet of white paper, a bedsheet, towel, etc etc, depending on how big the object is. The white/grey object has to be receiving near to the same light that the saw is getting, otherwise it will be out of step with the rest of the saw (handle, setting that you have the saw in), so could be too bright or too dark. This is where the great benefit of digital cameras lies - you can shoot it, check it, adjust it etc.

This technique works particularly well for "brushed" steel. In that case you can just place the object on a pale grey background ("Platinum" coloured background paper was my go to, back in the day) and the object will pick up a lovely sheen. I imagine that many old saws that have been restored have a virtual "brushed" look to them, so it may well be worth your while to pu a 1200mm wide roll of photo background paper from a pro-shop next time you're in Brissie (maybe a shop in Toowoomba might have it?). It may be paper, but it ain't that cheap.....

You newly found IT skills will be able to nail a supplier in no time flat...

I think that Disston would have made at least some of the Diamond Edge saws if not all. My reason for saying this is the "Enterprise" combination saw at the bottom of the second ad is straight from Disston's catalogue. Others are not so easy to marry up.

In the 1914 catalogue, for example, Disston listed fourteen saws as "special saws etched to order." They were not high end saws.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

If it was a photograph, then a highly polished surface will look dark if what it is reflecting is not lit (or is dark coloured). Perhaps they think that illustration suggest highly polished?

Brett, in thinking back "to the day", could the catalog illustrations be negatives? I have a vague recollection of seeing B&W negatives published in books / magazines.
The white on black etches would equate with a negative print.

Paul
going back to your initial question ...

For the Atkins 400 to be the best of all time, you would have to compare it to current commercially available saws, so my challenge is

how does an Atkins 400 (or a Disston D115, or an equivalent vintage Spear & Jackson) compare to

• a current production PAX Pax Handsaws - Lee Valley Tools
• a Lie Nielsen https://www.lie-nielsen.com/product/...cut-?node=4149
• Bad Axe's interpretation of Henry's classic D8 Bad Axe Tool Works - D8 Hand and Panel Saws
• the Seaton inspired panel saw from Skelton (UK) https://www.skeltonsaws.co.uk/hand-saw-1

and ?? dare I add ?? a home centre hard point saw ?? (ducking for cover and running away)

Originally Posted by ian

could the catalog illustrations be negatives?

Yes i seem to recall having seen -ve illustrations too, but these appear to be a strange hybrid of -ve and +ve. The etches are white indicating -ve, and the handles definitely look +ve. The blades could be either?

Ian

A difficult question. To "evaluate" on quality I would have to have similar examples of each saw. In other words the same ppi at the very least and sharpened at the same angles. The only saw I have ever tried out of the brands you mentioned is a Lie-Neilsen dovetail saw, which was a real beauty, but not very comparable to the 400. Incidentally the Lee Vally Pax saw is not made by them, but in the UK by the family firm Thomas Flynn. It is true to say that there may be any number of contenders in the modern bespoke world of handsaws, but I am unsure of their pricing without going to their websites. I think the Pax saws may be a couple of hundred dollars. Actually I just looked it up from your link and it is $139, but only a 22"panel saw.

We have to convert currency of the day to modern wages or vice versa. This link for carpenters in the US may be of assistance. However there was a wide range from $15 per week to $36 per week. I think a mode would be about $23 per week, but I cetainly did not do that scientifically. Just a brief scan of the figures to see what looked reasonable. Supply and demand was clearly an issue that affected the rate. On that basis a 400 cost about one fifth of the weekly wage. I will have to look up the weekly wage for a carpenter in 2018.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/scribd...start_page=215

carpenter's wage today looks to be around $25/hr although this link points to less in 2017:

https://www.indeed.com/salaries/Carpenter-Salaries

So the equivalent to the Atkins would be around the $200 mark.

However I am jumping the gun a little. What comprises "best?" To my mind it is a combination of appearance and performance and as I mentioned before it is beyond my capability and resources to evaluate performance: Hence my reference to the comparison I was planning for the Disston D-23s, although that was more to do with sharpening techniques. To evaluate performance you would have to have a similar style saw from each manufacturer. Appearance is altogether another issue and in some ways easier in that you don't even have to have the saw in front of you, although that helps: More difficult because it is a subjective opinion and we all have our version of what looks good.

Pax and Lie Nielsen to my mind are very unimpressive to look at. I think we pretty much dismiss the D8 style as we are considering the up market models in all the manufacturers mentioned. Personally I love the Kenyon style saws to the extent I made a replica so you don't have to convince me there.

Imitation - The sincerest form of flattery.

By all means keep the suggestions coming. However in mentioning the hard ppppp......tt saws I think ducking and running for cover is a thoughtful and safe move .

Regards
paul

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Yes i seem to recall having seen -ve illustrations too, but these appear to be a strange hybrid of -ve and +ve. The etches are white indicating -ve, and the handles definitely look +ve. The blades could be either?

Those illustrations are from way before modern printing methods. They are not photographs of 'living' saws, but drawings. There are a number of ways of suggesting tones & surface textures with drawings, but the scope is pretty limited compared with photography.

I can confirm how difficult it is to photograph polished saw blades! A mirror-like polish picks up all sorts of unwanted reflections, including the mug behind/beside the camera, if you try to take it straight-on. I've tried smearing the blade with a light application of wax (looks smudgy & doesn't enhance the saw at all but does control reflection a lot better). My best solution, still not perfect, is to choose a matte background (old bed sheets) and use flat lighting, getting all the angles lined-up just so. It often takes a deal of faffing about, and depending on time of day, it can be hard to eliminate stray reflections from within & outside the shed. You can get the blade right, only to have the handle look smudgy because flat lighting doesn't provide any 'modelling' (i.e. sharp shadow-lines) that delineate the lines & curves. I've thought about making a 'proper' setup for photographing small objects, occasionally, but restricted space & laziness always win....

Cheers,