Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 48
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default An ealy Disston dovetail saw

    This saw was made, on the basis of it's medallion, between 1871 and 1876.

    Disston dovetail 1871-1876 005.jpg Disston dovetail 1871-1876 004.jpgDisston dovetail 1871-1876 003.jpgDisston dovetail 1871-1876 001.jpg

    The Disstonian institute has a photo of a very similar saw about half way down this page: Online Reference of Disston Saws -- An Open-Handled Backsaw

    The plate is 0.015" thick, toothed 16 PPI, 8-3/16" at the toothline, and has a depth of cut of 1-9/16" at the toe and 1-7/8" at the heel. It's recently been filed rip and has a very ham-handed set of 0.075" per side for a total cut width of 0.030"! The handle is apple and appears to have been very lightly refinished. The split nuts are 1/2" diameter.

    Unlike the No. 70 dovetail saw I discussed last month (Undocumented Disston Saw) the handle of this saw fits me about as well as does a Lie Nielsen handle, i.e. a little small. I wonder why Disston chose to use such a small handle on the No. 70's when they obviously had figured out the correct size 30 years earlier?

    There have been a number of interesting older Disston dovetail saws coming up for sale lately, is somebody cleaning out a collection?
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

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





     
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,501

    Default

    Nice looking saw Rob. Was the spine more parallel to the tooth line originally?

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default

    Rob

    I am always surprised at how well those old open handle saws survive. I suppose they are not called upon to do really hard work. I particularly like the old style of sunken medallion as with this saw. The detail was much better, but all that was gradually lost as time went on.

    An even better example is with Atkins saws where the sunken medallion was retained but towards the end the definition was more of an "impression" and looked as though a child had done it.

    I think by my reckoning you are amassing quite a collection of early Disstons. Amongst these pre 1900 examples are there many other makes too?

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

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

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hiroller View Post
    Nice looking saw Rob. Was the spine more parallel to the tooth line originally?
    It's hard to tell. The machining/grinding pattern on the edges of the blade illustrated by the two arrows look to be the same. The toothline deviates only a little below the tip of the first tooth at the heel. These points suggest the possibility that the saw has only been sharpened once or twice.

    Another interesting feature that's visible under a hand lens is that both sides of the blade bear marks suggesting that this blade was ground to thickness during manufacturing. You can see some of these marks in the photo below just to the left of the tip of the green arrow. The marks appear to continue up under the back so I doubt that they're the result of a modern cleaning effort.

    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bushmiller View Post
    I particularly like the old style of sunken medallion as with this saw. The detail was much better, but all that was gradually lost as time went on.
    Yes, I like the pre-1896 medallions better than the later pressed models too. The 1870's and 1888-1896 medallions are the best in terms of definition. The pre-Glover screws of the 1880's generally have radial marks, possibly from ejector(s) and the relief isn't as good.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bushmiller View Post
    I think by my reckoning you are amassing quite a collection of early Disstons. Amongst these pre 1900 examples are there many other makes too?
    Yes, 83(!) of them covering all periods with 52 of those made prior to 1896. It's time to make some new saw tills as well.

    I only have one or at most two examples of the products of other makers. Over time I'm planning to acquire more as comparators in my hardness testing. I'll post an update on the competition (13 saws) over on that thread later today (Hardening of sawplates).

    Regards,
    Rob
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,857

    Default

    Rob,

    That's a great one. Among the better I've ever seen (not that I'm some guru...). Maybe the best!

    I won't ask for specific numbers, but are you coming across all of these early saws in junk store/"they don't know what they have" settings, or are these somewhat pricey eBay pickups?

    Not that it matters. I'm well and truly jealous either way.

    Cheers,
    Luke

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    Luke,

    Most of what I've used for my studies has come from eBay. Some more and some less with a fair number of very good buys found because sellers didn't know what they had. For instance, the No. 70 that I posted earlier about was listed as a "backsaw", not a Disston No. 70. If it had been properly listed it would have sold for a lot more than I paid. The joiners saw (1 of 6 or 7 in the known world ya know!) was listed as a "dovetail saw".
    My favorite times to bid on auctions are early mornings or mid-day on week days and my least favorite is Sunday evening.

    Cheers,
    Rob
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,095

    Default

    Ouch! That's a 'ham-handed' set on your little saw alright Rob! Looks like they've put a good-sized dimple in the plate below the gullet line, for good measure. Maybe they took their inspiration from a hacksaw blade?

    Pride has dimmed memory (as it does), but I rather suspect quite a few saws looked like that after I'd got at them them in my early attempts at saw first-aid, when my enthusiasm exceeded knowledge by an even greater margin than it does now. I'd worked on quite a few saws before I first read that only the top 3rd of the tooth is supposed to be bent over. I also had only the vaguest idea of how much set is required, so like many folks, I probably thought "if a little bit is good, lots must b better...."

    Apart from having a vague understanding of what you are trying to do when setting a saw, beginners should be aware that you have to contend with variation in pliers-type saw sets. There is variation between brands, but much more within the same brand, in my experience. At one point in the last several years, I had 5 or 6 'Eclipse' brand sets in my possession at the one time, ranging in age from pre-WW2 (I think), to probably the 1980s. Apart from the apparent deterioration in quality over time (most obvious in the crispness of the machining of the anvil), there was variation in what they would do to a saw-tooth at the same 'setting'. I have yet to determine if this is due to poor QC or user interference. I've looked closely at several dozens of the things now, and something I've noticed is that the 'top jaw', where it rests on the tooth-line, has usually been machined or filed to some extent. I assume this is done during assembly at the factory, but there is quite noticeable variation in the amount of metal that has been removed. You would expect that, of course, as they are dealing with castings, and I assume several patterns would be in use at any one time.

    A set I found in my father's stuff when cleaning out his shed was purchased in the 50s or very early 60s. It looked in pristine condition as if it had hardly ever been used. I suspect it hadn't, because it sat far too high on the saw and the plunger barely touched the tip of the tooth. So I took a file to it & gently cleaned up the top 'jaws' where they sit on the teeth, until the plunger hit the top of the tooth where I judged it should - it's now my go-to set for larger teeth. OTOH, I've struck a few that sat far too low, so that you couldn't avoid the sort of effect demonstrated on the little saw above, even with the anvil wound back to virtually no chamfer at all. Whether they left the factory like that, or someone modified them a bit too enthusiastically, I don't know.

    I've often thought that this apparent variation in set 'adjustment' is the root cause of much dissatisfaction with, & prejudice against, pliers-type sets. As a beginner, you don't know most of the finer points yet, and naturally assume any saw-set you get your hands on is ready to do its job. So when you get over-setting (or virtually none at all in the case of the one above) and rightly, blame the set. That's logical, but it's not a fundamental flaw in the principle of pliers sets, and to condemn all pliers type sets on the basis of a bad experience or two is probably the wrong conclusion, imo....

    Cheers,
    IW

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    Hi Ian,

    Glad you brought up the pliers sets. I've been using Somax sets, same design as the Eclipse, for some time. I've found that regularly lubricating them is essential. I've been doing this all along but your comment prompted me to write about it. The best lube I've found is lithium soap type grease.

    In my hands this simple expedient reduces the standard deviation of the tooth height by ~40% relative to un-lubricated sets.

    Cheers,
    Rob
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rob streeper View Post
    .....I've been using Somax sets, same design as the Eclipse.....
    Not just the same design, Rob, they are almost identical! I've been using a 'blue' Somax (the one for finer teeth) for quite a while, and it seems to do its job very satisfactorily.

    Quote Originally Posted by rob streeper View Post
    .....I've found that regularly lubricating them is essential. I've been doing this all along but your comment prompted me to write about it. The best lube I've found is lithium soap type grease.

    In my hands this simple expedient reduces the standard deviation of the tooth height by ~40% relative to un-lubricated sets.....
    Good tip. I use plain old motor oil on mine, which is ok. I'll try the grease next time I have one apart.

    Even though these things are the simplest of tools, it takes a few saws to get your hand/eye coordination going and put a really even set on the saw. Apart from a consistent squeeze each time, I try to place the set so the plunger hits each tooth smack in the middle. If the plunger hits the tooth too far forward or at the back, it will twist it slightly, & you don't get an even set along the row. And don't try to talk to me, either, until I've finished the whole side!

    Cheers,
    IW

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,501

    Default

    So with a heavily overset saw like this one where there are obvious dimples in the base of the gullets, any thoughts on whether is possible to save it other than with re-jointing and starting again?
    You could:
    - tap it flat on an anvil with the risk of snapping teeth with re-setting.
    - squeeze it flat in a vice with some tape next to the tooth line to reduce the set.
    - stone it with a diamond plate to reduce the set.
    - all of the above.
    - leave it along because it looks pretty.

  13. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Age
    74
    Posts
    6,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hiroller View Post
    So with a heavily overset saw like this one where there are obvious dimples in the base of the gullets, any thoughts on whether is possible to save it other than with re-jointing and starting again?
    You could:
    - tap it flat on an anvil with the risk of snapping teeth with re-setting.
    - squeeze it flat in a vice with some tape next to the tooth line to reduce the set.
    - stone it with a diamond plate to reduce the set.
    - all of the above.
    - leave it along because it looks pretty.

    Common practice is to fold a piece of paper over the teeth and clamp it down hard in a smooth jawed vise, like a milling vise.
    The teeth cut into the paper a little and leave you with nice even minimal set, One sheet of photocopier paper is about right for fine joinery saws. I pretty much do this all the time to compensate for poor technique in setting the teeth.

    I guess you could double up on the paper or use a thicker layer of material to even up, but I've never tried.

    Although this works for overset or unevenly set teeth, I'm doubtful it would work in cases where the plate is actually buckled, but I'd still try it before filing off all the teeth and starting over.

    Ray

    PS. I only ever stone the sides very very lightly to correct a saw that cuts off to one side. Usually one light swipe is enough to make a difference in how it tracks.

  14. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RayG View Post
    PS. I only ever stone the sides very very lightly to correct a saw that cuts off to one side. Usually one light swipe is enough to make a difference in how it tracks.
    Ray,

    I don't stone teeth after setting to correct the cut. I've found that setting the teeth again that are on the side opposite the direction of deviation works better. Often when I'm setting a new blade for the first time I set the teeth on both sides and then go back and set the teeth again on the first side I set. This procedure is usually only necessary on plates < 0.025" thick.

    Cheers,
    Rob
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  15. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hiroller View Post
    So with a heavily overset saw like this one where there are obvious dimples in the base of the gullets, any thoughts on whether is possible to save it other than with re-jointing and starting again?
    You could:
    - tap it flat on an anvil with the risk of snapping teeth with re-setting.
    - squeeze it flat in a vice with some tape next to the tooth line to reduce the set.
    - stone it with a diamond plate to reduce the set.
    - all of the above.
    - leave it along because it looks pretty.
    HR, I'd need to have the saw in my hand to make my decision.

    Flatten & start over? I might try hammering it out and re-setting. With such an extreme bend, there is a distinct risk at least a few teeth might break off, particularly if this saw is a bit on the brittle side. If I did decide to try & flatten it, I would start very tentatively at the heel. Resetting shouldn't be as fraught, because the bend is currently at the base of the gullets, and the new bend would be on fresh metal, clear of the already-stressed area, but again, I'd approach it very carefully.

    Paper & vise? I've not tried this method, & don't have a vise with suitable jaws, so that one would be out for me.

    Stoning? There's an awful lot of stoning to reduce that much set! In any case, you will still have a 'wrong' set, just reduced to some degree, but it would leave you with teeth that were rather thin towards their tips. It might work ok for crosscut teeth, but if the set is as extreme as it looks on the saw above, for a rip configuration there is going to be a gap down the middle where the teeth don't over-lap in the cut, so it would not cut terribly efficiently. Like Rob, I prefer not to have to stone any saws, at most I might use a light wipe with a dry carborundum stone to correct a faint tendency to drift, but if it's way out, better to try to correct the fundamental problem as Rob suggested.
    On a good day, my saws cut straight after sharpening, but I still have an occasional bad-hair day & can screw up a saw as well as the next man. It's virtually always a crosscut, and usually because I was trying to correct a very badly-sharpened saw, and took it too quickly (i.e. using multiple stokes of the file per tooth instead of just one or two). By taking it one or two strokes at a time, I can much better judge which way to put pressure on the side of the file to bring the tooth sizes back to even. I've found, the hard way, that if I mess it up, it's quicker, easier and has a far better result if I start over, i.e., joint & re-form the teeth. Having to do twice the work makes me much more careful & attentive the second time, too!

    I think my most likely answer to your quiz would be "None of the above". Since I already have more good users than I really need (there, you heard it from me!), this one would be destined for the 'museum'. This is a pretty sweet old saw, & it probably has more value as a reference piece to someone like Rob. So at least for the time-being, I would just 'think about it' & do nothing. But having said that, I know every time I looked at those teeth I'd wince, and sooner or later I'd be tempted to try something.....

    Cheers,
    IW

  16. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    Neglected to add that I do use stones to de-burr after toothing a new blade or re-toothing. A pass or two on both sides of the blade usually does it.
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Disston Dovetail Saw.
    By planemaker in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 6th February 2016, 08:03 PM
  2. A look at how Disston did It
    By DSEL74 in forum Saws- handmade
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 18th December 2013, 11:30 PM
  3. Dovetail vice and Disston Saw
    By section1 in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 1st October 2013, 12:50 PM
  4. Disston saw
    By clinkedovernail in forum ANTIQUE AND COLLECTABLE TOOLS
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 28th February 2009, 10:03 AM
  5. Is a Glued Dovetail Joint Stronger Than An Unglued Dovetail
    By echnidna in forum WOODWORK - GENERAL
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 29th July 2006, 10:03 PM

Posting Permissions

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