Thread: When it is not a No.12

Was that enough to prevent the litigious Disston company sue for breach of patent, something they were nearly as renowned for as their saws.

Nor sure Paul; but I do think Disstons demise in the end by H.K. Porter was just deserts. You only need look at the list of well established and talented saw manufacturers that Henry D destroyed through utter greed to control the hand saw market.


Stewie;

It needs to be said that H.K. Porter Co. were no angels. They recognized there was a profit to be made by liquidating the remained value within Disstson Co. They purchased the company at a very cheap price, used the employees retirement fund to repay the huge bank overdraft that Disston had built up, then closed the factory after 23 years (1955 - 1978 ). The employees lost out big time. No job, close to retirement age, and little of their retirement fund to live off.

It may be my juvenile mind but once you've noticed that the cut out shape in the No12 handle resembles a graffiti style cock n balls, it cannot be unseen. I apologise to everyone for ruining an icon.

Paul,

Given that you own several of the saws you pictured can you give an opinion on their relative quality, objective or subjective?

Regards,
Rob

Stewie

I suppose the demise of any company is disappointing. The No.12 was from the golden era of Disston up until the end of WW1. Disston had around 3500 employees, some of whom had worked for the company for more than 50 years. Disston also created a town for their employees, although this was not totally without conditions. It was an austere life without many pleasures.

It looks as though the turning point came around 1928 corresponding with the change in the product lines and the lead up to the Great Depression. Few companies emerged from the Great Depression unscathed and Disston was a casualty. See the difference between their 75th anniversary in 1915 and the abortive centenary in 1940. Greedy Disston family shareholders and no doubt other shareholders, apparently did nothing to help the company, but I don't think any of this reflects on the No.12 saw.

Disston bought out a number of rivals (about 17 companies leading up to WW1) and some were continued for a time while others were amalgamated under the Pennsylvania Saw Corp name for a while. I don't pretend to know much of the detail of these take overs, but such action was, and is, commonplace in the commercial world: The automotive world is another example of where this happened.

Nothing stays the same.

Regards
Paul

Rob

I can really only offer a comment on the aesthetics and of course in that direction they are so similar, which is the whole point of the thread. Really, if you like one, it means that in principle you like the others too.

All these saws were at the top of their relative ranges with the possible exception of the Stiletto. However that saws boasts nickel plated brass hardware, something none of the others have. So in a way that takes it one step above it's rivals.

As for cutting ability, the three Simonds perform beautifully and so does the Stiletto. I have yet to sharpen one of the No.12s, despite the fact I have four or five at least.

Regards
Paul

Paul,

Good post. I, for one, am perpetually on the lookout for the perfect No. 12 to add to my collection. My criteria for perfect are:

- All wood present, if a bit dinged up, on the handle
- No "newer" than the turn of the century medallion
- visible etch
- intact nib
- original toothing that hasn't been filed past the pitch indicator stamp at the heel
- original finish on handle
- no BLOODY NAMES stamped into the handle

Easy, right?

... yeah... right... I guess there's a reason I'm "perpetually looking".

I did, however, recently acquire a No. 16 that I'm extremely proud of, and I have been meaning to make a post about it, so keep a look out for that.

A quick question... Was the No. 12 the first saw to include a wheat/floral (a la Atkins) pattern carved into the handle? Or was that already around?

Any idea why they chose to use plant matter in the design? I guess in the 1800s, floral carvings of one kind or another were fairly vogue, so maybe they just used wheat because it was easy to wrap it around a saw handle and have it still look kind of anatomically correct?

Ok, time to scour ebay for the "perfect" No. 12... again...

Cheers,
Luke

Luke

I really don't know the answers to your questions. I think it was likely the No.12 was the first with wheat carving in the Disston range, but I don't know for certain whether it was before any other manufacturer.

Why wheat? No idea except I believe this is a fertility concept that may have been perpetuated over many centuries.

Here is a question for you. How was the Atkins floral pattern applied? My feelings are that it was not carved.

Good luck with the No.12. At least you are better positioned nowadays to pick one up without hefty shipping charges. However, as I said in the first post, they command elevated prices even on the "bargain" days.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

How was the Atkins floral pattern applied? My feelings are that it was not carved.

Hmmm, I'm not sure. I know where one is, and could have a look, but I would say you're likely to know more than I do.

Given that these were the days before CNC, what else could it be other than carving? A stamping method of some kind? I've honestly never thought about it before.

Luke

I think the stamping method may have been very close to the process used. I subsequently looked up on the net having initially taken the easy option of throwing the question your way.

I found one reference that stated they used a large press to "emboss" the floral pattern. However this came from a forum like ours and from contributors like you and I, so I can't said categorically this was the method used.

It does seem likely. It would have to have been done before the kerf for the saw plate was made or the press would have crushed the cheeks of the handle and in this regard would have been opposite to the wheat carving. The wheat carving was done with a cutter held in a machine similar to a large drill press and the timber blank was moved to the rotating cutter wheel. Hand carving probably was phased out towards the end of the nineteenth century.

In the Disstonian Institute the depictions from the 1890 catalogue to the 1906 catalogue show a marked difference in the "wheat carving." The earlier saw shows a lighter touch, more wheat and overall a general refinement missing in the later saw.

Regards
Paul

I do love me my #12s ... and I think a lot of others have too in the distant past.
(although it seems much harder to come across#16s than #12s. Maybe #16-style Disstons often were hardware-store branded instead)

They almost universally seem to be light and flexible in the blade, and have a good to excellent 'ring'.
(but then again, so do several old #7s I have)

Sort of a 'puzzle' for me ... from memory, I think the more costly Disstons were among #23+etc, #12, #16, D100, ...
but it is only the #12s that i have noticed in every shape from pristine to worn down to splinters.

You'd think a high-valued saw would be 10 or 11 or 12 ppi, and found in excellent condition - like most D100s eg.
But some people seem to have used their #12s wildly, ruthlessly and/or enthusiastically.

I have a set running from 5ppi to 5-1/2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12ppi in a saw chest that originally had a couple of those plus other saws.

https://goo.gl/photos/sHVUYv2ys785BjP28




in particular the well worn ~1865 Henry Disston one, with it's now very shallow carving ...

https://goo.gl/photos/9Tr9kYgmbGrtKege7

Also I nearly forgot this very lovely savage ... 4-1/2 ppi with the greatest handle ...

https://goo.gl/photos/TfQpJZ7K7m2TSRWf8

Just a little bit of information on the acquisitions by the Disston Co of rival saw makers as Stewie mentioned the subject earlier.

1857 Johnson & Conway Philadelphia
1859 P B Fraley & Co Philadelphia
1861 John Gunnis Philadelphia
1866 Bringhurst & Veree saw Co Philadelphia
1867 James Turner saw Co. Philadelphia
1867 Aaron Nichols Saw Co. Philadelphia
1867 Hill & Davenport saw co Philadelphia
1870 William & Harvey Rowland Saw Co Philadelphia
1871 Bissel & Moore saw Co New York
1874 Waterhouse Saw Co Portland ME
1890 Richardson Bros *
1890 Harvey W. Peace *
1892 Pennsylvania Saw Co
1893 Wheeler Madden Clemson *
1893 Woodrough & McParlin *
1893 Woodrough & Clemson *
1901 Baldridge & Hogan
1901 American Saw Co

* These five companies were operated under the National Saw Co banner.

There are eighteen companies (not seventeen as I previously stated) absorbed by Disston. The Morrill Tarrif Act of 1861, which penalised imported goods, including steel, made life difficult for saw manufacturers without their own steel mills. Henry Disston had built his own steel mill in 1855 and was well placed to begin the process of acquisitions.

My source for this information was Erv Scaffer's "Handsaw makers of North America."

Regards
Paul

I just had to put up this No.12 with cone head screws being sold by Daryl Weir. It is the real deal.

Mid 1860's H. Disston & Son No.12 28" Finer 6PPI Rip Hand Saw Custom Hand Filed

Disston No.12 mid 1860s.jpgDisston No.12 mid 1860s. Handle.jpgDisston No.12 mid 1860s. etch.jpg

Looking good for over 150 years old. Just beautiful.

I would expect it to be a nice little earner ( remember Arfur from Minder? ).US$510 at the time of posting.

Regards
Paul