Handsaw restoration

[Bushmiller]

I thought I had better start my own thread on these handsaws as I really was at the point where I was highjacking these two threads:

https://www.woodworkforums.com/f152/saws-hmm-60-yo-maybe-181369 posted by Sawdust Maker

and

https://www.woodworkforums.com/f152/saws-hmm-60-yo-maybe-181369 posted by Dovetail

Really I was only experimenting with the cleaning/restoration processes and in particular the rust removal by electrolysis. Whilst I knew from experience that it worked, I was unsure as to how it might affect the etch. The short answer is I don't think you need be concerned.

The first saw was surprising. I won't go into the electrolysis as that has been dealt with in Sawdust Maker's thread, but these are the results:

Saw clean up 008.jpg

This is the saw after electrolysis and rubbing with W & D up to 400grit. It was lubricated with mineral turps. The original saw plate was covered in surface rust and was approximately the colour of the handle. Here the handle is loosely attached just for identification purposes and there is a saw nut missing.

PMcGee particularly noticed that this Spear and Jackson might be a cut above (sorry about that one) the usual run of the mill S & Js because of the wheat carving on the handle. He was both right and wrong, but clearly picked up that something was out of kilter. The answer was hidden in full view (to quote FenceFurniture) as these next pix show:

Saw clean up 001.jpgSaw clean up 002.jpg

Clearly not a S & J but a Simonds. Much better . Just light wet and dry rubbing was required to reveal the etch, although only the top portion remains. I have read that their etch survives well but not the model numbers. I think from the positioning of the medallion and the skewback, it is their 10 1/2 model.

There is another indicator, which I need somebody more knowlegeable than me to confirm, is the "B" that was revealed under the handle:

Saw clean up 005.jpg

I am guessing this "B" stands for Beech, which is the handle timber for a 10 1/2 saw.

The 6ppi stamp is clear:

Saw clean up 006.jpg

and this is one for PMcGee. Paul, it nearly has your initials on the plate and handle .

Saw clean up 004.jpgSaw clean up 007.jpg

I think that would have been the old telecom organisation in Oz before Australia Post and Telstra. Being a Simonds the wheat carving and style of handle are now explained. The horns are a little shorter than original design. I'll think about whether I want to build them up. Whist this model was not their top of the line, they were happy enough to put their name on it and I think it will be an excellent user saw as the plate is straight and all the teeth are good. It just needs resharpening.

I think it will polish up a little more and I might also give it a little longer in the electrolysis bath to see if the shallow pits can be cleaned a little more. I had to curtail that process as I was unwilling to leave my 10amp chrger set up for long periods of time as it got quite hot. I really think a small 4amp charger is ample and even more desireable. Having to go to work severely interrupted the process as I did not want to leave it unattended for 13 hours .

I plan to use this saw as something of a test bed for restoration. The saw is worth some effort, but with parts missing (saw nut) and incorrect medallion, it is never going to be perfect.

This next saw was a Disston 22" panel saw I inherited from a mate. I haven't had the handle off yet and have only rubbed it back lightly with W & D to 400 grit, again using mineral turps for lubrication. The colour you can see near the handle was the same all over and I had originally thought it was a D7. There is a better picture of the saw as it was on Dovetail's thread above.

I was very pleasantly surprised when the lightest of rubbing revealed it is an earlier model D8 probably 1917 - 1928 from a combination of the medallion (1917 - 1940) and the "8" placed inside the "D" instead of hyphenated, which predates 1928.

The saw plate looks as though it originally would have had a high polish. There are a few dips in the saw which I might try to remove with electrolysis as the W & D was not reaching down. I received the saw freshly sharpened years ago, but it had been binding slightly in the cut. I had put this down to insufficient set, but I tried it today on some 125mm x 125mm square cypress pine and it was noticeably better with the semi-polished finish.

Saw clean up 009.jpg

Quite a handy little user and the only saw "real" saw I have of this size.

Regards
Paul

[pmcgee]

Saw clean up 002.jpg

... There is another indicator, which I need somebody more knowlegeable than me to confirm, is the "B" that was revealed under the handle:
... I am guessing this "B" stands for Beech, which is the handle timber for a 10 1/2 saw.

... and this is one for PMcGee. Paul, it nearly has your initials on the plate and handle .

Saw clean up 004.jpgSaw clean up 007.jpg

I'm not convinced about the electrolysis at the moment ... that (what looks to me like) mottled, dull gray background is exactly what two saws I have here look like and personally I really dislike it. And to me the etch looks foggy and "dis-sharpened" ... of course I could be misinterpreting your photos to my own biases.

I don't know about the 'B' stamp ... see what I can discover. Disston put an 'X' there for their highly-tensioned #12 saws ... and I remember something about a 'J' too.

And ... if it's got my initials ... Sorry ... you'll have to send it back. Sharpened, would be nice.

Cheers,
Paul

I'm not sure but that might be from the older model numbers than in this catalogue ... http://www.wkfinetools.com/hus-saws/...g-HandSaws.pdf
I'll have a look at that too.

[planemaker]

The Postmaster-General's Department (PMG) was created at Federation in 1901 to take over all postal and telegraphic services within Australia from the states and administer them on a national basis. Its minister was the Postmaster-General. In mid-1975 it was disaggregated into the Australian Telecommunications Commission (trading as Telecom Australia) and the Australian Postal Commission (trading as Australia Post). It also controlled radio and television broadcast licensing, which is now controlled by the Australian Communications and Media Authority. Telecom Australia changed its name to Telstra in 1995 and has since been privatised.

[Bushmiller]

I'm not convinced about the electrolysis at the moment ... that (what looks to me like) mottled, dull gray background is exactly what two saws I have here look like and personally I really dislike it. And to me the etch looks foggy and "dis-sharpened" ... of course I could be misinterpreting your photos to my own biases.

I don't know about the 'B' stamp ... see what I can discover. Disston put an 'X' there for their highly-tensioned #12 saws ... and I remember something about a 'J' too.

And ... if it's got my initials ... Sorry ... you'll have to send it back. Sharpened, would be nice.

Cheers,
Paul

I'm not sure but that might be from the older model numbers than in this catalogue ... http://www.wkfinetools.com/hus-saws/...g-HandSaws.pdf
I'll have a look at that too.

Paul

I have another saw or two that I will experiment with regarding electrolysis. I might try cleaning half of the saw that way and the rest with another method.

I have your Simonds reference, but I used this one for identification:

http://sawnutz.galootcentral.com/simonds/handsaws.htm

As far as I can see it is the only model that fits. The No 7 has the same saw nut placement, but is a straight back saw. I can see that your 10 1/2 has different medallion position. Having said that the catalogue I used dates from 1919 while your reference was 1923. I'm guessing that consistency was not a high priority then.

As to sending a saw back, you have to remember that possession is nine tenths of the law . (There again possession in itself is a crime .)

Regards
Paul

[pmcgee]

That's interesting about the #10/10.5s ... the difference.

The page you linked tells us Simonds from 1901-1926 ... and has a link to an early-style #9 with the Moon&Star logo.

and Josh Clark says (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...have-a-problem)
"We know that Simonds made saws from about 1901-1926. Their first saws, made up until about 1907, had the moon and star logo. The No. 72 does not appear in the Simonds 1910 catalog but it is in the 1919 catalog. So this saw was likely made somewhere between 1910 and 1926. "

The first models were just #5, #6, #6.5, etc up to I guess 10/10.5. Then there was a revamp ... maybe 1912/13?? rather than 1907 ... and then the #s became 61/361, 62/362, etc ... and kept changing somewhat obviously based on the 1919 vs 1923 catalogs.
The 1923 range doesn't seem to include any of the single digit models.

But then again I haven't seen a catalog pic anywhere of an 8A that has a metal 'reinforcer' under the handle in the spirit of the Harvey Peace saws.

simonds 8A handle.JPG

[Bushmiller]

I'm not convinced about the electrolysis at the moment ... that (what looks to me like) mottled, dull gray background is exactly what two saws I have here look like and personally I really dislike it. And to me the etch looks foggy and "dis-sharpened" ... of course I could be misinterpreting your photos to my own biases.

Cheers,
Paul
.

Paul

I wonder if the steel Simonds used ages in this way. These are some pix takenfrom Simonds saws I was watching on Ebay just out of interest. As you can see they do exhibit the mottled look (I can't bring myself to say ddd..dull grey easily). The nomenclature on the pix is not mine and some may be questionable.

Simonds 7 7.5 etc.jpg

Simonds No 5.jpgSimonds 7.5.jpg

I do still plan to attempt to refine the surface further on my Simonds, but I don't think it will approach the polish on the higher end Disstons, for example.

Regards
Paul

[pmcgee]

I'm not trying to be negative ... I need to gain more info and experience ... but those three pics look natural to me in there mottled-ness or rusty-ness.

But this photo here looks like is has a fog over it, ... but I'm interested to see it with more attention. I just don't know how much clarity will come back.



I was thinking (yep ... unlikely) about the variability of the electrolysis: amps ... electrolyte strength ... proximity ...

Just one thought ... maybe, like 120g W&D, it might be best used as an initial quick assault, to then be followed up by more selective means.

I was trying to think of a way to gauge "exposure" ... maybe having a thin nail ... or foil ... as a 'canary' item.

I'm also interested to see what citrus/vinegar/oxalic might be able to achieve.

Cheers,
Paul

[Bushmiller]

Thething about electrolysis is that it only attacks the rust. I don't pretend tocompletely understand the chemical process, but the effect of it is the rust "flows" from the object and is transferred to the sacrificial steel. The stainless tubing in my electrolysis bath already has a gritty coating of rust all over it.

When I get time off from work again, I'll continue to experiment.

We use citric acid at work for our chem cleans on the boiler tubing. The article to which I previously referred in "AWR" gave details on using citic acid. It leaves a yellow patina, which presumeably could be rubbed off with W & D>


Regards
Paul

[planemaker]

I would be interested to see whether the use of aluminum foil would make a difference to the aged patina of the saw plate. The feedback from others who after the initial removal of scale have used this method on overseas forums would seem quite positive.

[planemaker]

I would be interested to see whether the use of aluminum foil would make a difference to the aged patina of the saw plate. The feedback from overseas forums members who after the initial removal of scale have used this method are claiming very positive results.

[Sawdust Maker]

Interesting thread will follow with interest

My reading on citric acid is that the greyness will polish off

I still haven't found dad's battery charger to have a go at this - might have to find an old PC power supply and use that (as per BobL's doscussion sometime ago)

PS
Paul, do you gave any before photos of these saws? I'm curious to see how bad the rust might have been.

[Bushmiller]

I would be interested to see whether the use of aluminum foil would make a difference to the aged patina of the saw plate. The feedback from overseas forums members who after the initial removal of scale have used this method are claiming very positive results.

Planemaker

I would be interested too. Not familiar with the technique, but looked it up. Ball of aluminium foil and metal polish such as Autosol. Hmm....

I have an old saw which I am planning to use as a comparative test bed. Electrolysis, citric acid, aluminium foil and just W & D. The saw is fairly worthless and really to be trulty comparative the testing has to be on the same plate. I may get to that tomorrow.

Thank you for bringing the foil method to my attention.

Regards
Paul

[Bushmiller]

Interesting thread will follow with interest

My reading on citric acid is that the greyness will polish off

I still haven't found dad's battery charger to have a go at this - might have to find an old PC power supply and use that (as per BobL's doscussion sometime ago)

PS
Paul, do you gave any before photos of these saws? I'm curious to see how bad the rust might have been.

Nick

Unfortunately I didn't take any "before" pix of the Simonds at all, but it was very similar to the saws you have recently acquired. The Disston still has some of the crud on it near the handle. Tommorrow I will take a pic of it with the handle removed. I have to say I was very dismissive of the saw until I cleaned it up a little and realised what I had. Also it definitely cuts better with the semi polished plate so now it is treasured!

Regards
Paul

[Heavansabove]

I do not use citric acid on saws, this is spring steel (don't use electrolysis at all, but do use a lot of citric on other stuff). My approach has ended up as:

1. Scrape off the rust and crud with a sharp razor blade scraper
2. WD40 + W&D paper (whatever grades necessary) used with sanding blocks to clean up plate and get fairly smooth. This leaves a scratch pattern
3. Klingspor sanding blocks (from Jim Davey) with WD40: coarse - medium - fine to get the plate very smooth, and remove scratches from paper. I find this better than using finer and finer grades of paper
4. Alum foil with Autosol to polish. View seems to be there is little/no abrasive process, rather, a chemical reaction
5. Final polish just with foil, this is the shiny step - for me only works if you go through 1-4

Wipe off all residue between each step with kitchen paper, and after Step 5.

This gives a shiny saw plate, depending on the extent of pitting. I like a shiny plate so I can see the reflection of the wood on the blade when I am sawing.

Cheers
Peter

ps I do not go through this process with saws that may have historical value. Disston made millions of saws every year for decades, if you have unused pristine examples (the only ones worth worrying about) you do not need to do this anyway

[Bushmiller]

I managed to take the development a little further today, but to start a few pictures of the 22" D8 panel saw really to give an indication of the condition of the saw plate:

Disston saw test stage 2 001.jpgDisston saw test stage 2 002.jpgDisston saw test stage 2 004.jpgDisston saw test stage 2 006.jpgDisston saw test stage 2 008.jpg

I have refrained from any further work on this saw until I see the results of the "sacrificial test saw."

More on that after tea, which I have to cook as SWMBO is too busy with food preparation for tomorrow's knitting circle monthly meeting . Maybe I'll get some left overs for tea tomorrow.

Regards
Paul