Thread: The Simonds Saw Story

Hi Paul,

I have a similar docking saw but, in somewhat better condition.

Not sure of the manufacturer though???

It is not from Atkins, Disston, Symonds or Tyzack.

Graham.

Hello,

Just thought I'd share some photos on this No. 10 1/2 that I cleaned up. Tried to preserve the etching best I could. Still sharp and cuts well!
fr_1_size880.jpgfr_0_size880.jpgfr_3_size880.jpg

I feel like the plate was cut down at some point? Maybe even the teeth were recut? It's 21" long, 5 tpi.

Originally Posted by runofthemill

Hello,

Just thought I'd share some photos on this No. 10 1/2 that I cleaned up. Tried to preserve the etching best I could. Still sharp and cuts well!
fr_1_size880.jpgfr_0_size880.jpgfr_3_size880.jpg

I feel like the plate was cut down at some point? Maybe even the teeth were recut? It's 21" long, 5 tpi.

ROTM

Thanks for posting that. The No. 10½ was a full depth saw (The No.10 started as full depth, but later on became a medium depth) and coupled with that sharp cut off at the toe I think it was probably a 26" saw originally. A 22" or 20" panel saw would have had a thinner plate than the full size saw. I would expect your saw plate to be .036" thick. The panel saws would have been around .032". Your saw will still make a very good user I'm sure.

Regards
Paul

It most certainly has a very abrupt toe, & looks to me like it was shortened at some stage. A not-uncommon fate for lots of handsaws, either because of accidents or to get them to fit comfortably in a portable toolbox.

Paul, if it were a Disston I would've said the 4 bolts were consistent with a panel saw rather than a full-size - did Simonds not observe that convention?
Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

It most certainly has a very abrupt toe, & looks to me like it was shortened at some stage. A not-uncommon fate for lots of handsaws, either because of accidents or to get them to fit comfortably in a portable toolbox.

Paul, if it were a Disston I would've said the 4 bolts were consistent with a panel saw rather than a full-size - did Simonds not observe that convention?
Cheers,

Ian

It would be great if identification was as simple as that.

My experience is that five saw screws were reserved for top of the line models, but it is not even as clear cut as that. Generally, the panel saws (24" and smaller) had one less saw screw than their full sized brothers.

In the case of Simonds No. 10½ it only ever had four saw screws and as you can see from this 1912 catalogue (the No.10½ was introduced in 1910) it had one less screw in the panel sizes:

P1090274.jpg

The close relative, the No.10, which in the early days was a full width saw and present from the start of production enjoyed a number of guises and also broke the rule I mentioned above. This pic is from 1912 and shows one less saw screw in the panel saw:

P1090275.jpg

But this one is from 1909 and shows the same number of screws:

P1090272.jpg

Note that until 1910 it sported a lambs tongue handle. Also note the No.8½ next to it, which was a couple of models above, had again one less saw screw for the panel saw.

Probably the main reason for one less saw screw revolved around the panel saw handles, while looking the same shape, were in fact slightly smaller. It was a technical consideration of space available.

Disston and the other manufacturers followed similar trends, but there are exceptions.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by IanW

Paul, if it were a Disston I would've said the 4 bolts were consistent with a panel saw rather than a full-size - did Simonds not observe that convention?
Cheers,

Ian

Full size Disston saws (all the mainstays including No.7, 8, 9, 12, 16 etc) initially had four saw screws with the D8 (and the D100 which only differed by having a carved handle) being the exception having five. It was only with the introduction of the 20 series, the ACME 120 and the Victory saws (D115 and D15) that they went to five screws. However, there is always an exception or two: The D17 (Double Duty saw) had five screws.



Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

.... Probably the main reason for one less saw screw revolved around the panel saw handles, while looking the same shape, were in fact slightly smaller.....

Paul, that is just what I believed, up til now - the cheeks on panel saws are smaller, ergo, room for fewer bolts...

But this shows the limitations of sample size; all the panel saws I've seen or owned had 4 screws (where n= <10!) but all the handsaws had 5 (where n= a greater number but probably no more than 30 or so). None would have been earlier than 1920s.

Your catalogues (& personal collection!) give a vastly better sample of time & numbers, so I'm immediately consigning my 'number of screws' law to the wastebasket.....

Cheers,
ian

Originally Posted by IanW

Paul, that is just what I believed, up til now - the cheeks on panel saws are smaller, ergo, room for fewer bolts...

But this shows the limitations of sample size; all the panel saws I've seen or owned had 4 screws (where n= <10!) but all the handsaws had 5 (where n= a greater number but probably no more than 30 or so). None would have been earlier than 1920s.


Cheers,
ian

Ian

Actually, your observation is very feasible. As I said, the better saws had five screws so their panel equivalent would have had four screws. The D8 and the D-8 (my memory is that you have at least one and maybe more) while a very good saw and probably the most common of Disston's first line models was not top of the line. Nevertheless, it had five screws in the 26" version.

This might be of interest from Disston's 1918 catalogue:

Disston Saw Screws 1918 Catalogue.jpg

You may see that some saws just went down a size in saw screw, adding some weight to lack of space theory. Incidentally, many D8 saws had a smaller regular screw for the top hole.

Regards
Paul

PS: I hope the OP won't mind disston creeping covertly into the thread .