Page 22 of 30 FirstFirst ... 121718192021222324252627 ... LastLast
Results 316 to 330 of 444
  1. #316
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default Handsaw Tapering off

    In the light of my earlier thread on the No.51 no-set saws I thought a little about some panel saws. I had been cleaning up one of them and on a whim I grabbed every panel saw out of the rack ( not exactly every saw I have) and proceeded to measure their taper. Remember that panel saws were not just shorter: They were usually one gauge thinner too. These were the saws I tested.

    Firstly a rather nice No.4, which has been sharpened and is a pleasure to use. I had high hopes for this one. It probably dates from 1905 to 1909. It also has a hardware brand etch which is, I think, a little unusual for the top of the line models. Normally the mid range models picked up the hardware tab.



    The sawplate was .033" tapering to .017"

    A second No.4 22" dated 1910 to 1919 was .030" to .019"




    The next saw is a N0.5A (brass protector under the lower part of the handle), again 22" and measuring .029" to .018". I rather like this saw from the early era of the Crescent Moon and Star. It does still have that bog on the top horn. It looks like chewing gum and I really must do something about it.



    Then we have the Blue Ribbon Junior, which is a "boys" saw. This one is 22" (Disston and Atkins equivalents are 20") but as with all the other boys saws 9ppi. Sawplate is .034" tapering to .020".



    Starting to get into the tiddlers now with a 20" No.7 measuring .030" down to .023"



    and lastly an 18" No.7 1/2 which was .031" to .025".

    So it does appear that there is a trend towards better taper with the up market models.

    Apologies for the pix being at the foot of the page. This would be around the tenth attempt to add this post and the third computer I have tried. I may try to edit to re-position pix.

    Regards
    Paul
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  2. # ADS
    Google Adsense Advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Age
    2010
    Posts
    Many





     
  3. #317
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default A couple of wrong'uns

    Nothing too much wrong with this one and it looks original. It is a Simonds No.371

    Simonds No.371 wrong medallion 2.jpg

    But the medallion is Warranted Superior.

    Simonds No.371 wrong medallion.jpg

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/VINTAGE-SIM...19.m1438.l2649

    I find it a little disappointing that the seller has not mentioned this glaring anomaly as he regularly sells restored saws. I find it improbable that he does not know.


    This next one is a little more of an issue. Not a Simonds but a Wheeler Madden and Clemson, but I collect the occasional WMC too.

    The saw plate indicates that it is a No.25 and probably because it is stamped as opposed to etched an earlier model.

    WMC wrong'un.jpgWMC wrong'un No. 25.jpg

    However, that handle looks more like 1960 than 1860.

    WMC wrong'un No. 25 misfit handle screws wrong.jpgWMC wrong'un No. 25 misfit handle.jpg

    The screws, which are steel (should be brass), are in the wrong way round and the back side of the saw clearly shows the marks of the original handle. There is no medallion. There is very likely a number of extra holes under the handle.The seller describes the saw as 10ppi rip: Unlikely to be a rip saw although I can't see the teeth properly as the pix are blurred.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vtg-Hand-Sa...19.m1438.l2649

    This is how a No.25 looked in the 1871 catalogue (top model)

    WMC 1871 Cat 25,26,28,30.jpg

    Initially I surmised he was a casual seller of tools. When I checked his other items for sale he had 195 listings of tools including several saws, although nothing of much interest. To my mind this person either does or should know what he is offering.

    Other than that, it is all good .

    Regards
    Paul

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  4. #318
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    6,975

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bushmiller View Post
    Nothing too much wrong with this one and it looks original. It is a Simonds No.371

    Simonds No.371 wrong medallion 2.jpg

    But the medallion is Warranted Superior.

    Simonds No.371 wrong medallion.jpg

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/VINTAGE-SIM...19.m1438.l2649

    I find it a little disappointing that the seller has not mentioned this glaring anomaly as he regularly sells restored saws. I find it improbable that he does not know.


    This next one is a little more of an issue. Not a Simonds but a Wheeler Madden and Clemson, but I collect the occasional WMC too.

    The saw plate indicates that it is a No.25 and probably because it is stamped as opposed to etched an earlier model.

    WMC wrong'un.jpgWMC wrong'un No. 25.jpg

    However, that handle looks more like 1960 than 1860.

    WMC wrong'un No. 25 misfit handle screws wrong.jpgWMC wrong'un No. 25 misfit handle.jpg

    The screws, which are steel (should be brass), are in the wrong way round and the back side of the saw clearly shows the marks of the original handle. There is no medallion. There is very likely a number of extra holes under the handle.The seller describes the saw as 10ppi rip: Unlikely to be a rip saw although I can't see the teeth properly as the pix are blurred.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vtg-Hand-Sa...19.m1438.l2649

    This is how a No.25 looked in the 1871 catalogue (top model)

    WMC 1871 Cat 25,26,28,30.jpg

    Initially I surmised he was a casual seller of tools. When I checked his other items for sale he had 195 listings of tools including several saws, although nothing of much interest. To my mind this person either does or should know what he is offering.

    Other than that, it is all good .

    Regards
    Paul

    Regards
    Paul
    Yes in principle Paul I agree,the seller should know is apples from bent bananas.But saying that I personally would not trust a car salesman to know is cars from cars(I have personal experiences of this one)
    It's also very much a buyer beware market and especially these days of having a lot more information readily available.

    But I personally thank you for sharing this information next time I deal with my dealer in far north AU I will be far more informed [emoji849].

    Cheers Matt

  5. #319
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Horsham Victoria
    Posts
    5,713

    Default

    Think i will seek your advice before a saw purchase [emoji6]

    DaveTTC
    The Turning Cowboy
    Turning Wood Into Art

  6. #320
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default

    Recently I acquired a Simonds No.348 Docking saw. I already had a couple of these, but this example was from their handsaw era. How do I know this?

    Well, the catalogue pictures below are taken from 1912, 1916 and 1923. They are all fundamentally the same and show a saw with a "solid" handle, although it is still hollowed.

    Simonds No.348 1912.jpgSimonds No.348 Docking 1916.pngSimonds No.348 Docking 1923.png

    as opposed to a perforated handle and this is from a 1938 catalogue
    Simonds No.348 Docking 1938.jpg


    The saw was originally only available as a 30" saw but then a 24" version appeared too.

    So this is the 30" saw I received:

    P1030876 (Medium).JPGP1030877 (Medium).JPG

    Most of the Docking saws I have seen to this point have been the later model with the perforated handle.

    P1030893 (Medium).JPG

    It is interesting to note how different the two saws are. The solid handle version is heavy. I weighed them and the perforated handle is 1Kg while the solid handle version is 1.3Kg. The two saws have an identical depth of plate so all the difference is in the handle. The later saw uses a larger rivet head. There was a timber handled version made designated the No.347, but I have not seen this or at least have not been able to identify it.

    Clearly Simonds did not categorise the docking saw as a handsaw as when they discontinued the production of handsaws in 1926 the docking saw did not get the chop (was not docked?). Perhaps it was viewed more in the light of the crosscut logging saws.

    I wanted to keep updating the Simonds story, but rather than bog down this thread, if you are interested in docking saws in general I have started another thread outlining the basic thinking behind the type in a separate thread and a little information on saws from the other manufacturers:

    Docking Saws

    Regards
    Paul
    Last edited by Bushmiller; 18th June 2018 at 11:15 AM. Reason: Pix did not load properly. A mess
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  7. #321
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default

    In the recent parcel there was a saw that has eluded me for some time. Namely the Simonds No.9. The example I have, while not being pristine, is very passable. You might think that being a narrow saw it is a little more flexible than the full depth saws. That is not the case and it is really rigid.

    P1030873 (Medium).JPGP1030874 (Medium).JPGP1030875 (Medium).JPG

    I have done nothing to this saw so it will clean up very nicely. The etch is clear and the handle is in excellent condition although the medallion has not traveled well from the Northern hemisphere and has become disorientated .

    I should point out that this particular model is not rare as far as I can tell. However it has taken me until this time to find one. One point to note on this example is the wheat carving on the grip. Only my 1910 and 1912 catalogues show this, although the No.9 does not appear in my 1907 and 1914 catalogues at all. The 1914 catalogue is a "Pacific Coast" edition and it may not have the full range and I have only an extract from the 1907 catalogue so I don't know if it is the same issue. All the other catalogues either depict an uncarved handle or in the case of 1903 and 1905 have the lamb's tongue handle, which is also in Apple. That distinguishes it from the No.10 of the same era in Beech.

    I will still keep my eyes open for a lambs tongue version.

    Interesting, but only if you are interested in such things .

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  8. #322
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    6,975

    Default

    Paul,
    How I would love to land a saw like with the etch in fantastic condition.
    I’m comparing them to the saws I own.
    Can you tell if the back has been hammered or tensioned and is that creating the stiff saw.

    Cheers Matt.

  9. #323
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default

    Matt

    The saw does not look like it has been touched since it left the factory. Those blokes were absolute experts and there is never any indication of the correctional and tensioning processes that we know took place. I believe that there was a "clean up" stage that would have removed any indiscriminate or careless blows. I think this saw was like that from day one and is still as good as the day it was forged. It does need sharpening however.

    In particular, the most amazing part was the "blocking" that took place after heat treatment. The saw plate was probably all over the shop and yet you would never know.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  10. #324
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,070

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bushmiller View Post
    Matt

    I believe that there was a "clean up" stage that would have removed any indiscriminate or careless blows.
    IIRC Disston called the post-tensioning polishing/grinding 'glazing'.
    Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.

  11. #325
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default

    Thanks Rob.

    I would have had to go back to all the documentation to dig that one out. Something that is not always obvious was just how many steps there were to go from an ingot or steel billet to a finished hand saw ready to cut timber. It is the reason that we know there were only a few manufacturers of saws. Some saws were purely "rebadged" models from the major manufacturers.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  12. #326
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default

    Today's offering from the recently received parcel ( I have to do this in dribs and drabs to avoid withering stares from SWMBO, who has not quite reached the nirvana of hand saw collection.This in itself is ironic coming as it does from a Bhuddist. ) is an uncommon saw that is slightly damaged and well worn. This is a No.4A and in it's day, which was between 1900 and Nov 1904, it was top of the Simonds line:

    P1030868 (Medium).JPG

    The "A" suffix indicates it has a metal guard below the lower handle and as can be seen it is from the Crescent Moon and Star period.

    P1030869 (Medium).JPG

    The top horn will need a little attention to remove the supplementary and non standard hardware! And then to re-glue.

    P1030870 (Medium).JPG

    The etch is faint but it is there and will need a gentle touch when cleaning up

    P1030871 (Medium).JPG

    When I purchased the saw I could not see any indication as to which model it might be. I surmised that it might be a No.4, but it was a leap of faith. As can be seen in the pic below, the "No.4A" is just visible on the tooth line. As Luke Maddux said to me, "This one is a 4A. If they'd sharpened it about three more times, then the model would've been lost to the ages."

    P1030872 (Medium).JPG

    I am always hesitant to describe things as rare, but I would say this one is uncommon.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  13. #327
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default Simonds Third Level (budget)

    Simonds had three levels of saw quality. The top level bore the Simonds name and anybody who has read this thread will either know that already or most likely be bored to tears. The second level bore the Bay State name and logo, although I would contend whether it was truly a secondary line as it was the same price as the No.10 and No.10 1/2 in the Simonds line up. Then there were the budget saws, which I refer to as the third level, but this is purely my terminology. There were, in all, nine different models, but not all of them were produced at the same time.

    They have proved to be the most difficult to collect. This is primarily an identification issue. With both Simonds and Bay State there is an immediate indicator with the medallion. AS I have pointed out this is not conclusive and has to be verified by an etch on the saw plate, but at least it leads you to be hopeful. The budget range have a Warranted Superior medallion (eagle style) so that puts them with many other saws. If there is no etch or it is hidden the seller just says it is "Warranted Superior." It could the saw from many of the other manufacturers. A further difficulty is that some models only had a small saw screw and no medallion at all.

    So I trawl through the Warranted Superior saws eliminating any that have a medallion that does not feature an eagle and then attempt to match up the style of handle with the catalogue pix hoping that they are themselves representative. As a consequence of this difficulty I am still missing several "Third Levels" while I have nearly all the Simonds and Bay State. This is the Third Level line up and actual examples where I have them:

    King Philip, Skenandoah 1912.jpg

    King Philip

    P1030897.jpgP1030899 (Medium).JPG P1030900 (Medium).JPG

    No Skenandoah


    Mohawk 1916.png

    No Mohawk

    I keep losing all the the pix. This is my third attempt. I will post in small packages. More to come.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  14. #328
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default Third Level contd

    Continuing on:

    Hiawatha, Osceola 1912.jpg

    No Hiawathas , but a little more success with the Osceola. Firstly a 20"

    P1030906 (Medium).JPGP1030908 (Medium).JPGP1030907.jpg

    and a 22"

    P1030902 (Medium).JPGP1030903 (Medium).JPGP1030904 (Medium).JPG

    And finally a 26", which is the most interesting as in the four screw version it only appears in the 1903 catalogue. Even in the 26" length all other examples have three saw screws.

    P1030922.jpgP1030924 (Medium).JPGO 26 inch.JPG

    It is a well worn version with the etch about ("warranted" has already disappeared) to be filed away in the next few sharpenings. I have some more information on the Osceolas, but I will come back to that at the end of the "Third Levels."

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  15. #329
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default Last of the Third Levels

    Contd.

    The Sioux, Algonquin, Iroquois, Pontiac 1912.jpg

    No "The Sioux" or not that I can verify with an etch.

    The Algonquin I have posted before:

    P1030918.jpgP1030921 (Medium).JPGP1030919 (Medium).JPGP1030920 (Medium).JPG

    Iroquois 26"

    Iroquois 26 inch.JPGIroquois 26 inch h.JPG Iroquois 26 inch e.JPG

    and 18" tidler with a painted blue handle that I will have to rectify one day. As you can see there is no medallion on this little panel saw.

    Iroquois small.JPGIroquois small h.JPGIroquois small e.JPG

    Lastly the Pontiac:

    Pontiac.JPGPontiac h.JPGPontiac e.JPG

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  16. #330
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,099

    Default The Osceola

    I mentioned in the previous posts that I had an Osceola with four saw screws. This configuration only features in the 1903 catalogue. All succeeding catalogues describe three saw screws on a 26" hand saw. But the plot thickens. The 1903 catalogue shows the saw with a blue blade. It shows four screws even on the panel saw, which is unusual, but it is a drawing so could be an artistic stuff up for the panel saw.

    Osceola Blue blade 4 screw 1903.jpg

    The 1905 and 1907 catalogues also depict a blue blade but only three saw screws while the 1910 and 1912 catalogues indicate a blue blade unless a bright finish is specified. It is not until 1914 that the catalogue states a bright finish without a mention of a blue blade.

    So this got me thinking that I should really have a look under the handle of my 26" saw:


    Nothing, not a trace of blue

    P1030957 (Medium).JPG

    And then by chance I checked the reverse side:

    P1030961 (Medium).JPG


    Just the faintest tinge of blue and really difficult to capture in the pic. If I was not looking for it, I would never have spotted it:

    So then I took off the handles on the other two Osceolas. The 20" turned out to be a bit of a disaster in that two of the saw screws were steel including the medallion (wrong design of medallion too), which I confess did not look quite right to me and no further evidence of blue and some puzzling extra holes. The rusting underneath the handle is unusual as this would normally be the most preserved part of the saw:

    P1030966 (Medium).JPG

    Then I looked at the 22" saw.

    P1030964 (Medium).JPGP1030967 (Medium).JPG

    Blue!

    And a Number "3". For three holes? My supposition here is that the saws was not made by one person and it was passed through many different departments. Some indication must have been required as to the saw's configuration. However if that were absolutely correct every saw would have a number stamped under the handle so I doubt the explanation is as simple as that.

    P1030968 (Medium).JPG

    The blue looks to me as if it was more like the Prussian Blue used by machinists and would also explain why the blue does not survive 110 years. It is certainly not the deep, rich blue depicted in the catalogues. Perhaps it was once that colour. The double set of holes also seems more than coincidence and I believe it was done at the factory even if it was another mistake.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

Similar Threads

  1. Simonds Back Saws
    By Bushmiller in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 25th August 2014, 07:05 AM
  2. A couple of Simonds rescues.
    By Bushmiller in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 21st August 2014, 02:51 PM
  3. Interesting Saw On eBay - Simonds
    By Morbius in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWERED
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 25th September 2013, 06:59 AM
  4. Sad story
    By Christopha in forum WOODIES JOKES
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30th July 2004, 10:46 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •