Thread: Eclipse Saw Set

Old Ladies: Schränkzangen Feintuning 2 - pimp my saw set part 2

This is my flea market find…..

The writing inside the handle is very poor, it is a Eclipse ?7 Made in England

Last Import - 1.jpgLast Import - 2.jpgLast Import - 3.jpgLast Import - 4.jpgLast Import - 6.jpgLast Import - 7.jpg

Hi Dale,

You are correct, there's a whole other world out there.... there are hundreds of patents issued just for saw sets, there are books on different saw sets, and collectors who specialize just in collecting saw sets...

The Saw Set Collector's Resource

The blue somax is my choice for fine tooth saws. ( a copy of the eclipse.. ) you can tweak a standard eclipse with a bit of judicious grinding.

Regards
Ray

Ray how fine do you need the tip of the hammer? What is it on the blue somax?

Originally Posted by DSEL74

Ray how fine do you need the tip of the hammer? What is it on the blue somax?

Fine enough to cover the upper half of a tooth without impinging on a tooth either side. It's a compromise, make it too thin, & you will marr the tooth too much. I'm not in a position to measure the plungers on my Somax, but before I got it, I reground an old Eclipse. I didn't work to a particular width, just eyeballed it to what I thought was a good size compared with the teeth I wanted to push over.

The post you put up with "Bugbear's" efforts is interesting. I think we can over-intellectualise this saw-setting business too easily! His comment that the "tpi numbers" are way off indicates he too suffers from the common misconception. They are not meant to correspond to tpi other than very roughly. They are there as guides & if they happen to correspond to settings you like for certain tpis on your saws, you are in luck - they are really just reference points so you can go back to settings you like. Setting saw teeth, is, like most tool settings, a compromise which in this case, has to take several factors into account. Tooth size is only one, saw plate gauge is another, whether the saw is intended for rip or crosscut and what sort of wood you are cutting, & plain old personal preference are the other important issues. So you cannot just set teeth to a single number on a saw set!

The angle on the anvil is probably the biggest compromise of all on this type of set. Ideally, you would have different angles for different gauge plates, since your objective is to give a set that is x% of the plate width. The actual amount will be a matter of choice, based on the type of saw (rip generally a little less than x-cut), the type of wood (more for soft woods than hard) and personal preference. Given the range of typical plate gauges of hand saws and the actual size of teeth, Mr. Eclipse has settled on an anvil angle that is somewhere in the middle of what's needed. If you are inclined to work it all out, I think you'll find that the 'error' introduced by having a fixed angle is pretty minor, & likely to be swamped by other errors that sneak into the process.

I can fully understand Klaus's issues with soft anvils. I have several sets, and the anvil hardness varies noticeably. If I were setting saws by the dozen daily, I would be looking for a similar solution to his.......

Cheers,

I heard a story once about a Saw Doctor who had a customer with a very old and VERY hard Sandvic hand saw. One time earlier on the doctor went to set this saw and as he did the teeth just snapped off at the base of the tooth. His remedy was to sit the saw in the sun all day till just after lunch when he would set and sharpen the teeth while still hot from the sun's heat

Quote from IanW
I think we can over-intellectualise this saw-setting business too easily!

I agree with Ian, we need set to give clearance to the saw plate so it will not jamb in the cut. The set also clears the saw dust during cutting. With 40 years on the tools to sharpen and set a saw is only done to be able to use the saw effectively when you are making something. It is a means to an end. I think sometimes we spend more time trying to work out the "science" behind an operation rather than using the tool to create an article.
I bought an Eclipse Saw Set when I first started in the trade and have been happy with the results it has given me over the years

We were talking once about setting saws and Dad recounted how his old Sandvik was a mongrel to set. He found that if he left it in the sun for a few hours before setting it would be OK. But, set it cold and teeth would snap.

Originally Posted by Peter57

We were talking once about setting saws and Dad recounted how his old Sandvik was a mongrel to set. He found that if he left it in the sun for a few hours before setting it would be OK. But, set it cold and teeth would snap.

Too bad if you had a Sandvik in Melbourne then!

A hammer-setting 'solution' courtesy of Mr Patrick Leach's list (of enthusiastically priced tools )

Saw set - sliding.jpg

Apparatus screws to the bench ... saw teeth protrude through the jaws somehow and you slide along 'ting-ting-...'

In some of the 1910-ish books that cover saw filing, they refer to the plier-style saw-sets as (basically) "orright for the average punter, I suppose"

Cheers,
Paul

Originally Posted by pmcgee

...Apparatus screws to the bench ... saw teeth protrude through the jaws somehow and you slide along 'ting-ting-...'

And the plane above the gadget is for levelling out any teeth that are over-set?

Originally Posted by pmcgee

...In some of the 1910-ish books that cover saw filing, they refer to the plier-style saw-sets as (basically) "orright for the average punter, I suppose"

I've wondered about what advantages hammer-setting offers. In one of his books (or was it in a FWW article?), Tage Frid showed his methods for setting saws. One method he recommended for fine teeth is to put a small screwdriver in every second gullet & twist (it works, I've used it, but I take no responsibility for erratic results! ). His more refined method employed a steel block with a small chamfer on one long edge. The saw blade was laid on the block with the teeth hanging over the chamfer by the desired amount, then he went along with a small, pointy hammer on every second fang, "ting, ting, ting"..... Flip, repeat. All done in 13.2222 seconds.

First, the guy must've had an eye better than a sharp-shooter, and second, I fail to see how this could produce a more consistent result than pliers-style sets used with reasonable care. The only advantage I can see is that it is quick (in the right hands!), and I guess when time is money, you want your saw set, sharpened, & back in action with as little delay as possible.

I can get what I want with my 77s, after a bit of practice, so I think I'll stick with the known devil for now.....

Cheers,

I've got a big Sandy (care of Paul) that I have put of fixing because I've heard a few things about how hard they are. I'm pretty slow, being on training wheels still, so I'm not sure I want to use up a whole file re-forming and sharpening it only to snap a bunch of it's teeth off when I go to set it!

Is hammer setting gentler, or just faster?

Originally Posted by Berlin

.....Is hammer setting gentler, or just faster?

Since you have to move the same amount of metal the same distance, I'd go for (b)..Faster.....

The only hammer-setting I've been up close & personal to was when my dad used to set the crosscut saws in the bush. He did it with a ball-peen hammer, using a splitting wedge for the anvil, so it was a slightly less delicate operation than setting a 15 tpi dovetail saw!

I guess pliers-type sets have issues, and lots of people must have battled with them, else why such a plethora of designs & types & variations on the theme? The first few times I tried setting teeth I consistently set one side more than the other. It would seem like a difficult thing to do, but I managed it quite easily. After a while, things settled down & I learnt to be more consistent on each squeeze, & place the set so that the hammer hits the same point on each tooth. The results are markedly better, but I still miss-hit & distort an occasional tooth.

I guess you are going to have to bite the bullet at some stage & tackle your Sandvik, Matt. Can't say I'm fond of super-hard saw plate either. It no doubt reduces the number of times you need to sharpen, but it also encourages putting the job off as long as possible. I also wonder about the economics, when a file can cost considerably more than a new hard-point saw.....

Cheers,

My brain is sitting off to one side and slightly backward I think. I been writing one reply since yesterday ... slowly write 4 paragraphs ... slowly delete 2 ...

but ... on the Sandvik issue ...
I'd like to collect info from people who have actually broken teeth themselves ... or seen it happen.
I wonder about the causes. Maybe it is more technique than metalurgy?

I'm sure I have heard the Sandvik in the sun story with Disston named also.

I don't know how the teeth can break if they are only being moved a few thou in the correct way??

Have a look at this page ... maybe it will be fine ... OldTools Archive -- thread with message 94017

The bit about hammering being gentle I was going to mention in the 'first' post ...
"Something (old) I read pretty recently was suggesting that two small taps to set was better than one press in the pliers. (I could be wrong - it could have been you Ian talking about how to use the plier-set properly)"

Cheers,
Paul

BTW - I have a Mermaid branded S&J saw here (26") that has 9 teeth broken of 140 ... and the plate has 2 cracks running from 2 gullets. It is probably 1920-ish. I have wondered if it wasn't meant to be set ... or was assaulted by a setting machine or ... ?

I've wondered about what advantages hammer-setting offers. In one of his books (or was it in a FWW article?), Tage Frid showed his methods for setting saws.

Yes - first in those books it is sometimes unclear (to me, in the past) whether they are talking about a circular saw blade (sawmill size) or a big crosscut saw or a handsaw.

The speed thing is the only idea I can think of. I am picturing those videos of people hand-making files and rasps ... "ting ting ting ting ting ting ..." I can only guess that the very very experienced hand might be a bit like that with the hammer setting.

Regarding the consistency I have a few different thoughts.
One - maybe you get consistent, similarly to the filing part.
Two - my brain entertains the possibility that some inconsistency might not be a bad thing, in the same way that hand-filed rasps are improved by human inconsistency. But it could be that we are naturally horribly inconsistent (unhelpful) and that our inconsistency is only an advantage when we are just 1% away from a machine-like consistency. I don't know the answer - it is one reason I have bought some professionally filed and setup saws to study and learn from.
The third possibility is that maybe they *didn't* do that good a job. (heresy?)

Homesy and I went to see an old guy selling a set of Disstons a few months ago. He had been a cabinet-maker (I think) for 20 years or so, and then did something else. He showed us some nice furniture he had made - including some made from Oregon pine. He was kinda horrified at the idea of turning some big pieces of Oregon into a workbench ... and I don't think he was onboard with the fine sort of workbenches made by some forum members.

He had a group of Disstons ... and thought they were rarer than they actually are. And his attitude to sharpening was "that's easy, just get a file and zip zip". I don't think it was a case of one of those very capable people who are understated about describing the work they do ... he just wasn't that interested in the process I think.

Cheers,
Paul