Thread: Which hand saws to buy first?

Originally Posted by kman-oz

Now I'm really confused. Worry not, I'll play it by ear as always.

Sorry kman - I could show you what I'm rattling on about in a minute if you were in the shed. However, I'm sure you'll soon figure out what works for you.....

Originally Posted by kman-oz

I was thinking that I'd try a handle out of pine or something first, but of course this will mean that the next handle will have to be done with holes already in the plate... I think I may be better served following the plate-holes-first method now that I think about it.

Yep, it was precisely because it's a bit trickier to mark out handle holes from the saw that I go with the handle-first method. The saw covers the handle so that you can't line up the plate easily - it's not fatal & can be worked around, but it is more awkward. That, plus I am constantly fiddling with handle geometry, & adjusting the grip angles, so that most handles I've done to date have been a bit different in one respect or another, so I can't just settle on a single handle template with holes pre-marked. Once I have decided on 'permanent' handle geometry for each saw type, I will be able to standardise my bolt holes & stick with it.

Originally Posted by kman-oz

I can't say I've ever seen a carbide tipped drill other than those for masonary. I found a cobalt alloy drill that is precisely the same size as the bolts. The blurb on the card says they're appropriate for hardened steels?! I might try drilling a scraper plate first and see how it goes.

The drills I'm referring to are freely available in the 'big box' hardware stores - I forget what they are called exactly, but they have blue paint on them & are called 'builders' drills or something like that. They have cartoons on the package that shows them punching through wood, brick & steel like they were Balsa.

The cobalt drills are certainly better than ordinary HSS, but you'll find they lose their bite too, after a hole or two in spring steel, whereas these things have stood up to drilling many holes, except the one I used with cutting fluid. It didn't help at all, & I chewed the carbide tip to bits, which didn't improve its drilling abilities at all. .

Go for it - I reckon it's always best learning on the job....
Cheers,

I found the drill bit you're talking about, it's a Sutton 'General Purpose' bit. Blue and silver packaging, looks a lot like a masonary bit. However, I spoke with the store owner (ex-Carpenter) and he specifically recommended not using these for hardened steels. A tradie over heard the conversation and said that he's broken quite a few of these and gone back to task specific drills instead.

They made a convincing argument, so I'll stick with the cobalt bit and see. Thanks Ian.

Originally Posted by kman-oz

I found the drill bit you're talking about, it's a Sutton 'General Purpose' bit. Blue and silver packaging, looks a lot like a masonary bit. However, I spoke with the store owner (ex-Carpenter) and he specifically recommended not using these for hardened steels. A tradie over heard the conversation and said that he's broken quite a few of these and gone back to task specific drills instead.

They made a convincing argument, so I'll stick with the cobalt bit and see. Thanks Ian.

Hi kman - I guess it's a case of ignorance coming up trumps. With no-one to tell me they won't drill spring steel, I just went ahead & tried a couple, and they work better than anything else I've tried so far, including cobalt drills, by a very big margin. The only drills that I've found that will drill as clean a hole in my sawplate are similar ones flogged at the woodshows - you know, the bloke standing there drilling holes through a file? A friend of mine bought a set, much to my amusement, as I thought they were a complete gimmick, but he brought them over one afternoon & we put them through some severe tests. I have to admit, they do work well. I don't need or want a full set, though - pity they don't sell individual sizes.

Cheers,

You were *so* right about the drill bit thing. I'll never doubt you again! It managed one hole before sharpening, so I've sharpened it twice already. For the next one I'll get the GP bit.

Anyway, here is the almost complete Tenon Saw. This particular bit of Walnut has the worst of the sapwood through it, I chose it specifically for the first attempt. Having said that I don't think I'll make another for this saw as it has worked extremely well thus far. The majority of the volume is heartwood and all of the really important fixings have heartwood beneath, but the split nut side only has a sliver of heartwood showing. When it's been lapped down to final thickness there will be a little more though.

The blade and back are a very firm fit and there is no play at all even without the split nuts screwed down. I only fitted the back to the blade on Sunday afternoon and immediately had a go at some scrap to test. Aside for the fact that it cuts tremendously well I also found that it had a tendancy to tip over the work peice at the end of the stroke. I tried shortening my stroke but that felt uncomfortable. Instead I've cut a corner off the tip of the brass and it feels much better.

The handle has yet to be shaped obviously, but even in this hard edged form it feels comfortable enough to use. I now also understand why people like Walnut for handles; it's such a nice timber to work. Saws, planes, chisels, carving tools and knives all take easy cuts and leave a lovely finish. It would be an honest shame to use sand paper on it I reckon.

Anyway, if anyone has any comments I'd love to hear them. Bear in mind that this is my first attempt.

EDIT: Oh, and the split nut driver in pic 2 is made from a 25mm putty scraper. It only needed about 2 minutes of lapping to fit into the split nuts perfectly.

The saw look great. The handle in the rough looks just like the templates. Did Mike come good with the saw plate and split nuts? I'm still waiting for mine.
Take care
Kevin

Not bad considering I don't have access to a band saw, eh? I found myself leaving quite a bit of stock to remove after the coping saw, just so I could carve it back with a chisel.

I received the gear a few weeks back actually, but did nothing with it until now. I did give him a little poke though. He's had some family issues but I understand he's now back on the ball as it were.

When I've finished the carcass saw I'll have to bring them over and compare notes.

Lookin' reeeel good, kman!

The handle rough-out looks the part - don't be afraid to do some heavy shaping. I'll admit I use a fair bit of cloth-backed paper, even on woods like Walnut (along with a whittling knife, scrapers, & various rasps & files. If you think it feels good now, wait til you start getting some nice roundy bits....

Part of the problem with the saw tipping may be the high position of the handle. You are up a long ways from where the rubber hits the road with this one, making it a bit awkward to get the feel of where everything is.

I think I would have dropped the grip down a bit - the grip angle looks good, and well-suited to a saw used around the bench-top level. But it might give you better control if the handle were lowered a bit, so that your hand is pushing it closer to the line of the teeth. That would need a bit of rearrangement & redesign of the cheeks, so you are stuck with this one. But when you have time, you should experiment with both angle & relative position of the grip - it is very revealing, but complicated - not only by the positions in which the saw is most used, but by personal preferences. I think I have almost sorted out what works best for me, but I wouldn't be so bold as to suggest I know what's good for all!

Anyways, looks like you are well & truly hooked on this sawmaking business. The cure is a looong ways away from you, at this point!

Cheers,

Thanks Ian, that means a lot. I want to get it down to final thickness before shaping it at all, and I may even leave it assembled soI can test as I go.

Regarding the handle position, you may well be right about the vertical position but mt feeling is that the back was just too long and heavy. If I'd used a heavier timber for the handle it may have been better. Removing some mass from the tip not only makes is cut straighter, but makes it easier to start too. In hindsight maybe some 3/4" or 7/8" brass might have been better.

I did a few more minutes of testing last night with some scrap on the new bench (with the correct height) and found it cuts true and clean with little physical effort and no conscious effort. I tried cutting to a line and to a depth and both operations worked quickly and cleanly. More than this would be asking for a miracle in my case!

When it's a little more presentable I'll post some more pics.

kman - I'm still a learner with a long ways to go, so my observations are just suggestions - you will find what works best for you by being bold & experimenting, as you've done. That's the best part of making your own tools, you find out what is essential to make them work well, & in the process become better at using them, so it's a double pay-off.

I'm all for playing with blade shapes as well as handles. Tapering blades on larger saws has a long pedigree, and certainly improves balance as well as adding an interesting aesthetic. In fact I don't have many 'square' blades left in my user bunch, as I realised when I put this pic in the 'show us your home-made tools' thread....

Cheers
Edit: Forgot to mention that the heaviest brass spine I have used is 3/4 by 1/4". That seems to be adequate for saws up to 300mm length or so, but you might need heavier for longer, deeper saws - don't know, as I haven't been into that territory yet. That saw of yours looks like a whopper in the pics, and you may be pushing the blade material to its limits if it's the 20 thou plate you're using. The two top saws in the pic below are 25 thou (top one, 300mm long) and 30 thou (centre - 350mm) plate. The thinner the material, the more stiffenening it needs, and/or the less wide you can make the blade. I discovered this very quickly when trying some 15 thou plate. I made the blade too deep on one of my first tries, and it was not good at all. I cut 20mm off the width, & it's now the best dovetail saw I've ever used!

I hadn't put much thought into the shape of the blade, but that photo gives me some ideas.

It's an interesting perspective you put on the dimensions Ian. For your reference this one is 16" (400mm) with a 1/4" x 1" brass back. So yes, it's a whopper! The plate has 4" of useable depth and it's 25 thou thick. My research suggested that anything bigger would require the 30 thou plate.

Originally Posted by kman-oz

..... For your reference this one is 16" (400mm) with a 1/4" x 1" brass back. So yes, it's a whopper! The plate has 4" of useable depth and it's 25 thou thick. My research suggested that anything bigger would require the 30 thou plate.

OK - yep, that's a whopper!

I think 25 thou plate will be good for that size saw, and better than 20 thou, which would require some heavy-duty stiffening to make it behave under all normal circumstances.

I couldn't give other than very rough dimensions of what works for the different plate thicknesses I've tried, because it's a loose equation, both length & width have to be considered, of course. I think the 450mm saw I've shown would work ok in 25 thou, for example. As I've never had my hands on a Disston original, I don't know what they used, but going on similar sized saws, it was probably close to 30 thou. And further, if you are a practised sawyer, you'll get away with a more flexible blade than a novice, because your action is smoother & more consistent. I don't think I would have liked my 15 thou dovetail saw nearly so much, 40 years ago!

C'mon - I'm impatient to see the finished item.....

Cheers,

I'm preparing for an interstate trip and the young master's birthday parties (two in fact) over the weekend, so you're likely to have to grow your patience for this one Ian.

The 12" carcass (cross-cut) has 20 thou plate but only 2 1/2" of useable depth. Again, my research indicated that anything bigger would really require the 25 thou plate. That one will be a few weeks away at least.

Stay tuned!

The big tenon saw is all done and working beautifully. It turns out that the handle pattern I used was too big for my hand; it's OK on the palm and heel, but I can also use a full four finger grip comfortably. The next one will be adjustde according to the Veritas saw handles for a proper fit.

On the plus side the hang angle and height work really well now that it's all shaped up nice. Loving the weight of the 1" brass back too, I can properly concentrate on the fore/aft stroke without having to think about the down force of the cut.

I was a little concerned that I may have chosen a tooth pattern that was a little too fine, but in practice the weight of the back means it still bites well even on very wide cuts. It also feels very positive and smooth during the stroke. The only time I was able to make it jump was on a 60mm wide Ironbark rip cut.

The Wenzloff site specifically says that they can't guarantee that any given plate will cut perfectly straight because they aren't tested. Well, it might as well have been tuned by a professional for all the faults I can see because it's as straight and true as I can conceive. And lets face it, a deep and wide tenon is the first place you'd notice.

Once the cross-cut saw is finished I'll post some pics of the results they can achieve.

P.S. Finish is three coats of Miniwax wipe-on poly.

That's a pretty impressive result for a first try! I don't think there can be anything more satisfying than building a tool that not only looks good, but works well too. Well done!

BTW - how many tpi does it have? I looked back through previous posts, but can't see any mention of what you settled on, or what rake angle, etc. ??

Now all you have to do is resist going on to make more than the saws you really need!

Cheers,