Thread: The Simonds Saw Story

I wonder if, when the saw arrives at the winners and he has a close inspection and realizes what he has done, will we see it go up for sale again?

I would love to see what his description would be, if he was honest about it, it might go as

"This is a very rare monumental blunder saw, only two owners, one of them a complete idiot, urgent sale, I need to get my wife back"

Regards

Graham

The hyperbole here is interesting. An advertisement from the WW1 era:


Regards
Paul

Spurred by your post regarding No. 12 look-alikes I souced a Simonds No. 5. It got lost in the mail for two weeks but it finally arrived yesterday. My objective is to determine the variability in hardness of the blade in comparison to the Disston No. 12's.

Rob

What era is the saw from by the medallion? It has to be at least pre 1922. We may convert you to Simonds yet. I will be interested to hear the hardness outcome.

Regards
Paul

Paul,

I don't know. What do you think?Simonds No 5 medallion.jpgSimonds No 5 blade shot.jpg

Rob

The outside dates from the medallion would be 1905 - 1922. However, the etch or what I can see of it, would put it after 1912 as it appears to have more "back ground" to the Simonds banner.

Regards
Paul

Paul,

Thanks, it appears then that it is a fair contemporary of the Disston Golden Era saws. Would an additional shot of the etch help?

Regards,
Rob

Yes it would. I was going on memory before, but now I'm at home I can compare to the catalogues. The fundamental difference is that the earlier etches were more of an outline while the later versions had the Simonds banner "greyed" in.

Regards
Paul

Patrick Leach had a few Simonds offerings for sale this month including a couple of very minty saws worth sharing in the thread. An unused mitre saw and used once #61.
(There is also a very nice 3.5in James Swan Slick in between)
IMG_1381.jpg

Thanks for those Gavin.

The No.61 is a beauty with the dollar medallion. That would make it a 26" saw and handsome with the blue etch still intact. From the pic the mitre saw is even bigger and looks to be around 28" - 32" as long (no pun intended, but freely given) as it is not photographic error. And the chisel is very slick with a little superfluous nonsense on the handle. I could imagine building a log cabin using a tool like that.

Regards
Paul

May as well add Patrick's inimitable prose (from here http://www.supertool.com/forsale/octtlist2017.html ):

MS94 Simonds 26" 5 1/2pt rip, the $2.50 model with the enameled
button; used once, put away, and still as sharp as the day
it was made, this is their model No.61 and is the firm's
top of the line offering; Simonds was America's best saw
maker, forget about the Acme whatevers, this is the Acme
in handsaws before Simonds stopped making them just before
WWII as they were non-union and the union carpenters
boycotted them (or so I was told by a longtime Simonds'
employee before he went to saw heaven); the second best
example I've had, only bettered by one in the original box
I had long ago; minor tarnish from handling, this and some
Disston's that follow all came from the same chest;
http://www.supertool.com/forsale/oct/t57.jpg $355.00

MS95 James Swan 3 1/2" bevel back slick with original turned
handle; best quality, this one saw barely any use, all it
needs is a honing; laminated steel blade measures 12" from
edge to bottom of socket forging; mid-line crest bevels to
each side; middle:
http://www.supertool.com/forsale/oct/t57.jpg $235.00

ST43 Unused miter box saw with sweetheart logo etched on the
24" long blade; made by Atkins for Stanley, it's 4" from
bottom of spine to the teeth; found with the Simonds saw
above it, it's right out of a time capsule; bottom:
http://www.supertool.com/forsale/oct/t57.jpg $155.00

One of the most coverted Simonds saws, although not the absolute rarest, is the fabled No.51. It does not appear in any catalogues although I did see a single reference in an advertisement. It was clearly available for a number of years so why was it not included in the catalogues? No idea is the short answer.

Just to refresh your minds in the distinct possibility that you do not think Simonds handsaws during every waking, and some sleeping, moments, the No.51 was Simonds "no set saw. As such it was in competition with Disston's ACME120 and Atkins' No.52.

I had resigned myself to never owning one of these saws. In itself of course it is not really that important: Only if you want to have an example of each model so that the collection is complete and tells a story. I am now close to that but still not quite there.

However, I recently had the opportunity to purchase a No.51. In the same week I spotted what I thought could be another example. It was a bit ropy looking but it had a dollar medallion. A $3.00 medallion to be precise. As a straight back this meant that it could be one of three saws. A 28" No.361, A 28" No.61 or a 26" No.51. This is what I got:

P1020879.JPGP1020878.JPGP1020877.JPGP1020876.JPG

Things to note are the shorter instruction regarding no set.

"DO NOT SET
CORRECT FILING IS ESSENTIAL"

Only four saw screws

Wheat carving on the grip only.

Compare this to the other saw I got:

P1020873.JPGP1020874.JPGP1020875.JPGP1020880.JPG

This saw is is in very good condition (the other one needs a little hammering attention, but nothing Rob Streepers dog hammers can't cope with) and note that this has five saw screws, wheat carving on the grip and flat and additional instructions:

"TO BE USED ONLY ON DRY, SEASONED LUMBER
DO NOT SET. CORRECT FILING IS ESSENTIAL"

However, being the reclusive little company that it is, Simonds do not offer any more information on filing.

I was going to wait until I had restored these saws until I posted information. However, the restoration got shoved down the list of priorities and then today I noticed that Michael Merlo was selling one of these saws in the US. Not only that he pleaded ignorance on the saws history other thn the fact that he probably has more examples of this saw than most and deferred to me to provide some history.

I have eight Simonds catalogues and the No.51 is not depicted in any!

I can make some deductions, but they are best guesses: Not concrete evidence.

The saw Michael is selling has a manufacturing medallion and four saw screws with the shorter "no set" message. If for a moment we consider the longer message is the later saw (a leap of faith) this makes Michael's saw pre date the "dollar" medallion saws which were 1912 - 1916 (according to the catalogues) I have also seen the No.51 with the manufacturing medallion and five saw screws so that would be post 1916. This is the saw for sale:

Simonds No.51 4 screws handle carved.jpg

This is the listing:

UGLY 1914 ERA SIMONDS "NO SET" No.51 26" 10PT ULTRA FINE FINISH CROSSCUT SAW

I posted this next pic of Michael's saw back in 2014. It has five screws, carved grip and flat and the longer message.

Simonds No.51 five screws, carved handle and flat. Long message.jpg

Consequently I place the "dollar" medallion saws between these other two. This makes the saw currently up for sale quite rare as conjecture is that the Blue Ribbon saws, of which the No.51 is one, may have come out initially with the manufacturing medallion.

As Michael points out, they seem to come in one size only, 26" and 10ppi. Although amongst his collection he thinks he might have a panel saw.

His tooth line (the saw, the saw ) is worth a look. All done by eye without guides. Meticulous.

Regards
Paul

Paul, a couple of comments from someone who knows very little about handsaws & even less about these 'no-sets'.

I haven't seen any conjecture on just what these saws were meant to be used for, though I may easily have missed it, so apologies if that's the case. To me, 10 ppi on a no-set saw implies it was meant for 'finish cuts' that were either too long or not of an angle that could be tackled in a mitre box. Something I often noticed when I lived in in Canada was that the older Victorian-era houses had the widest, thickest architraving I have ever seen. It was often made up with several strips joined along a detail line to make them look like a solid piece, but even the individual strips were often wider than most 'ordinary' mouldings (& I'm talking about skirting boards etc. of yesteryear, not he pathetic bits of beading that passes for architraving in 'modern' houses). So I wonder if they were intended for the carpenters who had to fit-out that style of house?

Second, what fleam angle has been put on these saws? My limited experience with the Disston 77 & the couple of 'no-set' saws I made using constant-thickness plate, indicate that the 'extreme' 45* fleam angle is crucil on no-set saws. Tapering the blade must help, and is possibly vital in some situations, but it's those funny teeth that seem to contribute the most. I say that because when I put a lesser angle on the 77 it cut like a dog, and the little non-tapered saw I made cuts as sweetly as any saw I have, as long as it has that magic 45* fleam (& it's sharp!).

And I understand the admonition about using them on "dry lumber" - my no-set backsaws sure don't like wood if it's the least bit moist....

Cheers,

Ian

All the big three had one of these "no set" saws. Actually Disston had three, the ACME 120, the No.77 (with which you are familiar) and another which I think was the No.80, but I can't find the catalogue where I saw that. Atkins had their No.52. I think only Disston on their 120 used that tall tooth which required a special safe back cant saw file. They all describe them as being used in fine finish, cabinet work and leaving a finish that does not have to be sanded and is ready for glueing.

How much of that is a marketing hype? I don't know. I have not restored my two saws yet but I quickly looked at the fleam. The older (dirtier) saw has about 25 degs and the five screw saw 15 degs. So nothing conclusive there. Simonds did not even list their saw in the catalogues. I have just remembered the context in which I saw the No.51 advertised so I will try to track it down, but I don't recall any detail on filing.

I did have another look at Michael's saw, but he modifies it to his specification anyway. I once asked him what fleam, rake and slope he uses. He replied that he didn't know, but he just gets on and does it without recourse to guides or anything else!

Simonds No.51 with sloped gullets.Michael Merlo.jpg

I have a single saw prepared by him (and boxes of files bought also from him for a lifetime of filing). I think you have seen it. A Disston D-15 Victory saw. I would be interested to see how this No.51 performs. I can't measure the taper on the plate at the moment as both my digital verniers have chosen to pass away. Somewhere I have a micrometer which I will have to dig out.

I think it is significant that these saws are narrow (as opposed to the full or regular width) as there is less chance of them binding in a cut. Having said that, I suspect they are problematical in thicker timbers maybe over 38mm.

Regards
Paul