Results 316 to 330 of 444
Thread: The Simonds Saw Story
-
1st February 2018, 08:55 AM #316
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
1st February 2018 08:55 AM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Age
- 2010
- Posts
- Many
-
8th February 2018, 01:14 PM #317
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
8th February 2018, 04:57 PM #318
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
-
8th February 2018, 08:01 PM #319
Think i will seek your advice before a saw purchase [emoji6]
DaveTTC
The Turning Cowboy
Turning Wood Into Art
-
18th June 2018, 11:07 AM #320
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
PaulLast 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!"
-
19th June 2018, 11:50 AM #321
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
19th June 2018, 05:53 PM #322
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.
-
19th June 2018, 06:04 PM #323
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
20th June 2018, 08:42 AM #324
-
20th June 2018, 09:09 AM #325
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
20th June 2018, 09:44 AM #326
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
27th June 2018, 03:17 PM #327
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
27th June 2018, 03:28 PM #328
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
27th June 2018, 03:48 PM #329
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
27th June 2018, 04:37 PM #330
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
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
Similar Threads
-
Simonds Back Saws
By Bushmiller in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWEREDReplies: 11Last Post: 25th August 2014, 07:05 AM -
A couple of Simonds rescues.
By Bushmiller in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWEREDReplies: 4Last Post: 21st August 2014, 02:51 PM -
Interesting Saw On eBay - Simonds
By Morbius in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWEREDReplies: 8Last Post: 25th September 2013, 06:59 AM -
Sad story
By Christopha in forum WOODIES JOKESReplies: 2Last Post: 30th July 2004, 10:46 PM