Ebay Droppings Thread.

[Simplicity]

Matt

That is a Disston No.9 backsaw, which featured a Reagan handle for people with a deformed hand (really, I have never got my head around the style of that handle unless it is purely cosmetic: I am reluctant to call is aesthetic, although I would have believed it was designed by Mr. Spock off Star Trek during a rare, substance-induced creative moment.)

Attachment 435934

The saw was described as being an "improved" style, but in what way is unclear.

This saw listed is particularly interesting in that a former owner as well as being a woodworker also had a pet elephant. While he was restoring the saw with the spline off, the elephant sat on it . He probably also had a Mercedes Benz 230SL whose roof had suffered the same indignity. Maybe not: This happened at the factory where an elephant was employed to deliberately perform this task
Attachment 435933

It was a very annoying habit and consequently elephants are no longer recommended as a preferred pet. You can't even give them away now, which is demonstrated by the fact that there are none on Ebay

Regards
Paul

Paul,

Are you suggesting that the saw in question was damaged deliberately and is not as rare has pink elephants.?
I'm going with Mr Ian's view off not picking a fight with you over the saws origins.
But ,I do think your pushing the boundaries a bit.
Also ,I know Ian may have more input regarding the pink elephant question having spent his working life working with animals.
I'm just a bit concerned seeming you both have recently been visited by some other forum members?[emoji849].
As a side note ,the glass house merc as they are know ,was quite a nice car in its time.
I actually performed quite a bit of metal insertion on two cases many years ago(restoration in a body shop)
Oh the memories of cutting floor pans out !!

Cheers Matt,
Withholding my biding on this one!

[Bushmiller]

Ian

You are on the money as it is indeed a hybrid. The No.9 itself was half way between a half back and a full back. Would that make it a three-quarter back? The plate should taper (round toe) down from the back to the toe without any spline at all.

I was a little too focused on the affront of offering up a saw in that condition to notice that the saw itself was wrong. It is a little difficult to judge in the pic but it looks to me as through the medallion is barely able to find any metal: It might have missed the saw plate all together.

If this were "Mythbusters" it would definitely warrant a big "busted." (I have just realised I may have to be careful how I use that phrase). If it were Monty Python, a great big foot would materialise from nowhere and complete what the elephant started and accompanied by a discordant klaxon.

Regards
Paul

[Simplicity]

Note point,

As Paul pointed out the saw is a Disston No 9 Backsaw.Well bent backsaw!
There not the most comfortable saw handle to use.
With the chunk of wood missing from the top horn!!

Cheers Matt,

[Bushmiller]

Matt

I think is is very prudent not to bid on that one.

Sometimes I "watch" these ridiculous listings just to see what happens, but that one doesn't even reach that level.

Back in the sixties the 230SL and the later derivatives (250SL and 280SL) were quite popular. It was always my impression that they were driven primarily by women, but that is a sexist view that was not considered anti-social then. It is different now so I won't mention it.

What I do remember is reading a road test of the 230SL and the author saying that it looked as though an elephant had sat on the roof because of the very noticeable dish. (You can get the same effect if a 'roo lands on the roof from about 10 meters in the air). So yes, I am guilty of plagiarism .

Regards
Paul

[Simplicity]

Like here

[Simplicity]

Matt

I think is is very prudent not to bid on that one.

Sometimes I "watch" these ridiculous listings just to see what happens, but that one doesn't even reach that level.

Back in the sixties the 230SL and the later derivatives (250SL and 280SL) were quite popular. It was always my impression that they were driven primarily by women, but that is a sexist view that was not considered anti-social then. It is different now so I won't mention it.

What I do remember is reading a road test of the 230SL and the author saying that it looked as though an elephant had sat on the roof because of the very noticeable dish. (You can get the same effect if a 'roo lands on the roof from about 10 meters in the air). So yes, I am guilty of plagiarism .

Regards
Paul

What is this back in the sixties you talk of Paul,
I don't understand [emoji849].

Cheers Matt,

[Bushmiller]

Just returning to the Reagan handle after being so scurrilously led off track , in the patent it describes the top of the handle as being for the thumb. I can only conclude that my thumb is in the wrong place. It is clearly only intended for a right hander, but in those days (pat. date 1874) there weren't any lefties. Lefties were beaten until they realised they had made a mistake.

I think the back in the listing is brass. No.9s had a steel back. Some catalogues depict it as polished steel but the example that Matt has put up looks as though it is "blued." Generally American manufacturers favoured steel over brass. Disston's No.4 had a "blued" back, the No.5 had a brass back and the No.7 a polished steel back. For the No.9 they don't state the finish. Like me they concentrated more on the handle .

Regards
Paul

[Bushmiller]

What is this back in the sixties you talk of Paul,
I don't understand [emoji849].

Cheers Matt,

You wouldn't.



but I do



Regards
Paul

[IanW]

..... in the patent it describes the top of the handle as being for the thumb. I can only conclude that my thumb is in the wrong place....

Funny you should say that, Paul. I first saw a pic of a the 9 quite a few years ago & it really appealed to me, so I set out to make a version for myself (not a copy, you understand - the patents may have lapsed by 100 plus years, but just in case... ). The top saw in this pic would have been #2 or 3 (I've made several of them) but is essentially what it looked like (don't know why I photographed it from the 'obverse' side, but the other side definitely has no thumb groove!).
Cherry b.jpg

It's a bit different from the D9 profile, but the projecting front is similar. A later model is one of my most-used backsaws. I did try a 'thumb groove' on the original handle, but I agree, it seemed anatomically unsound to me, too, so I quickly scrapped it & have only used more conventional handles on all of my "D9s"

Cheers,

[Bushmiller]

Ian

Two nice saws and the timber is...? I also note the brass backs, but I guess without specialised machinery, brass is easier. In the Disston range steel was the easier product and the No.5 with the brass back was quite a bit more expensive than the other versions.

No.4 $16.00
No.5 $21.00
No.7 $17.00
No.9 $16.50
No.77 $ 20.00

The last one is, of course the no set saw with which you have experimented. These prices are taken from the 1918 catalogue and being a trade catalogue are for a dozen saws. In other words a single No.9 would have retailed at around $1.38

Regards
Paul

[IanW]

......Two nice saws and the timber is...? ....l

Cherry...

....... I also note the brass backs, but I guess without specialised machinery, brass is easier. In the Disston range steel was the easier product and the No.5 with the brass back was quite a bit more expensive than the other versions......

Not sure about that, Paul. Depending on the alloy, brass may be a bit easier to fold, but mild steel is pretty forgiving and would present no more problems than folding brass in a factory situation. There was a strong preference for steel spines in the U.S., and I've read different suggestions as too why that was so. The most plausible to me is that steel was cheaper and stiffer weight for weight, which appealed to good 'ol Yankee practicality.

My reasons for opting for brass are 1) I prefer the look; 2) I don't fold my backs, and cutting a 20 or 30 thou slot in a brass bar is a lot easier on me & my crude slotting setup than cutting steel; & 3) Rolled steel bar takes a lot more cleaning up than brass bar, which isn't covered in scale & usually only needs a light sanding to clean off any mill marks. Justifiable laziness....

....... In other words a single No.9 would have retailed at around $1.38.....

Gee, those were the good old days alright, if you could buy a saw at cost! I think the retailer would've liked to add some sort of profit margin, would he not?

[Bushmiller]

Ian

You are correct with your reasoning with brass versus steel for the backs. I was just commenting on the irony of the use of steel then and now. Besides which I do like the look of brass. I think most woodworkers agree that timber and brass compliment each other.

With regard to catalogues the whole issue is confusing. The catalogues actually state the retail prices, but they were primarily intended for the retailer and not the consumer. I have somewhere a comment that a discount sheet was normally included with the catalogue for the retailer's benefit and this presumeably would have included volume discounts too. For a long time I just could not get my head around what appeared to be a conundrum. In fact, even without the presence of a discount sheet, the Simonds "dollar" medallion saws confirm my comments above. The medallion was the price of that individual saw, it was also etched on the saw plate and it corresponded with the price in the catalogue.

Simonds No.62 2.JPGSimonds No.62 3.JPGBlue Ribbon 61, 62,71 & 72.jpg

You can see that a 26" No.62 handsaw cost $30/doz which does equate to $2.50 each. After 1916 and by 1919 the same saw cost $36/doz, but there was no longer any etching on the sawplate. I don't think any other manufacturer adopted this style and it was probably too restrictive in a commercial sense.

Simonds only ran with these 'dollar" saws for about four years and then stated that they were discontinuing the style because material costs had become too volatile. It may also be that some retailers wished to sell at a price other than that stated in the catalogues, but that is my conjecture.

Regards
Paul

[Bushmiller]

Ebay is generally a good medium for online purchases but just recently there seem to have been some real traps. This one for example:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Disston-D-1...19.m1438.l2649


caveat emptor 1.jpgCaveat Emptor 2.jpg


It is described as a Disston 1917 D-15 Victory saw. There is no picture of the etch verifying this. The handle is from a No.12. The date is in the right region in that the medallion was used between 1917 and 1940, but the seller has chosen to mention only the earliest possible date. Warning bells!

He describes the saw as hand sharpened and 12ppi crosscut. I would say that it was sharpened many times and the most recent was a long time ago. It has been almost sharpened away and the tooth count has gone with those sharpenings. I would hazard a guess it is about a 6ppi rip saw. So I looked at the feedback and there we have a story. Feedback rating 71% over five listings. Not good.

Regards
Paul

[Simplicity]

Ebay is generally a good medium for online purchases but just recently there seem to have been some real traps. This one for example:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Disston-D-1...19.m1438.l2649

Attachment 436139Attachment 436140Attachment 436141

It is described as a Disston 1917 D-15 Victory saw. There is no picture of the etch verifying this. The handle is from a No.12. The date is in the right region in that the medallion was used between 1917 and 1940, but the seller has chosen to mention only the earliest possible date. Warning bells!

He describes the saw as hand sharpened and 12ppi crosscut. I would say that it was sharpened many times and the most recent was a long time ago. It has been almost sharpened away and the tooth count has gone with those sharpenings. I would hazard a guess it is about a 6ppi rip saw. So I looked at the feedback and there we have a story. Feedback rating 71% over five listings. Not good.

Regards
Paul

Paul not sure if it’s just me,
Only got the first pic rest won’t show.

[jimhanna]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Veritas-H...%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Just watched a Veritas MK II honing guide sell for 41 GBP plus 2.95 postage on the UK ebay site.

A UK supplier axminster.co.uk, has the same thing new in stock for 47.11 GBP with free postage.
https://www.axminster.co.uk/veritas-...SABEgIkNPD_BwE
(I have no connection with this supplier)

Seems crazy to me but obviously people get carried away when bidding. Paying over 93% of the new price for a second-hand item when the new item is available from stock just makes no sense.

Regards

Jim