Thread: New Handle for an Old Saw

A pretty fine effort for a first attempt, Zac. But I'm afraid the threshold for this slope is very shallow and you may have already past the slipping point & be on your way down.

The safest way is to just get on & use your saw & don't start wondering if the hang-angle could be just a little different or the grip in a slightly different position relative to the blade......
Cheers,

Hi Zac,

great job with the new handle, is that Jarrah that you used?

If so, is there much difference in the weight?

Graham.

Hi Graham,

It is Jarrah, so it would be heavier compared to the super dry beech it replaced. I can't notice the difference, though.

Thanks,
Zac.

Originally Posted by Fergiz01

........... It is Jarrah, so it would be heavier compared to the super dry beech it replaced. I can't notice the difference, though.....

Y'know, it's a funny thing, but you tend not to notice the weight of a saw handle anywhere near as much as you might expect. I've made handles from woods with quite a range of densities, and the same size saw will feel pretty similar to use, because the weight of the rest of the components tends to swamp the difference in handle weights. Out of curiosity, I just checked a few handle blanks I have on hand. I don't have any northern hemisphere Beech, but I had one in Qld walnut (air-dry density of .69, which is pretty close to Beech at .66), and compared that with a She-oak blank (ADD .96). There's a big difference in weight between the Qld walnut blank (160g) and the She-oak (265g). I'll lose a good few grams more in the shaping, but the She oak will still end up being 70-80% heavier when finished. Jarrah, at an ADD of .84, would fall in in between these.

So then I weighed two similar 12" saws, one with a Tas. Myrtle handle (density .7, so very close to Qld Walnut), and one with a She oak handle. The Myrtle saw weighs 550g, all up, and the she-oak saw 560g. The spine on the She-oak saw is a bit shorter than the myrtle handled saw, otherwise there'd be another 60 or 70 grams to it, but it does illustrate the point that the weight of the handle isn't a big part of a medium-sized saw.

Just an observation....
Cheers,

Zac.
That's a top effort for your first handle.
You now possibly have no hope off going back to being just a user off tools.
Also be aware of what Ian W says he's the god father of making tools here.
He has on more than one occasion encouraging individuals into tool making a very dark and scary place with no return.
And I really look forward to seeing your next saw handle.
Do you have one in mind!!

Cheers Matt

Ian - I reckon when the handle is fitted the weight you notice is more the torque of the saw acting on the pivot of your wrist. Since the handle is at the pivot, any weight difference here makes no difference to the torque felt by your wrist - relatively weak muscles. Handle weight would be felt by the biceps at the pivot of your elbow. Biceps are usually pretty strong so they might not notice the small weight changes between wood handle types. My two cents on this anyway.

Matt - thanks for the kind words. I have no immediate plans for more Saw handles, but may make a plane tote from the same piece of wood in the near future.

Zac

I think you did exceptionally well and the Jarrah has come up a treat. You did pick a difficult saw to start on the slippery road with those vintage split nuts. They are problematical, but that is only on a good day.

Regards
Paul

Well it happened again but this time to a hand saw. I don’t have any pictures of the old handle that broke, but it wasn’t this ornate. I just copied a template from the TGIAG website of a Disston #7. Not even close to IanW standard, but I’m getting better at fitting the nuts and bolts into the handle.
9F4B6CE0-C19F-425A-9758-97A5B5C495AC.jpeg687AC394-1B05-412F-B6D1-B2AC649DAEB2.jpeg

I dunno - looks pretty good to me from the pics! At least as good as an original - they didn't waste a lot of time cranking the handles out, back in the day. The grips were usually shaped & smoothed ok, but on most old Disston handles (at least on the workaday models), there are usually still bandsaw marks on the top & bottom.....

Cheers,

Like Ian said,
From were I'm sitting it looks pretty good.
The main point is it comfortable in your hand.
That is the only critical point to ever fuss over the rest is reall just to look good and fill our egos.
I would be more than happy to hang that up in my creative zone.
And I'm feeling it's not the last we we will see either.

Cheers Matt

Fergiz

The lamb's tongue style is a treat. How does the slippery slope feel?

Something that is a real bonus for the likes of us is that all those saws were mass produced. So with only a few exceptions the handles were bashed out on a mass production basis. They selected apple for the up market models and beech for almost everything else. They chose those timbers because they were easy to work, stable, readily available (at the time as apple is harder to source today) and consistent. In later times they used miscellaneous hardwoods and coloured them to look like exotics as apple became harder to source. We do not have those constraints of production and can use anything that seems suitable.

This means that with the addition of a new handle we may even be able to improve on the appearance, at least, of the original saw. Possibly the comfort of the handle can also benefit, particularly with later model hand and back saws, as their handles became more blocky (utilitarian) and ugly.

Well done.

Regards
Paul

Paul,

Thus far I’ve only replaced the handles as they’ve broken. But now I realise that I can buy a good quality saw blade without a handle and make one, saving a bit of coin. Making the blade is beyond me for the time being.

Thanks,
Zac.