Thread: If challenged to a duel...

Ian,
This is a end of an era I’m sad.

Cheers Matt

That is fantastic Ian!

Of course, I don't believe that that is the last saw Yeah right ... I know you too well, my friend.

Incidentally, what are the angles of the marking gauge?

A beautiful set. We would not expect less!

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by IanW

Y I've learnt never to say 'never', but I can assure you all it will be a long time before I make any more saws, if ever!

Cheers,

Ah, the Sean Connery of saw making: "Never say never again."

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by derekcohen

.....Incidentally, what are the angles of the marking gauge?......

Thanks Derek, and your contribution was acknowledged...

Angles for the layout gauge are 1:6 & 1:9 - apologies, I meant to mention that.

I made a crude gauge with these angles on opposite sides, about 30 years ago, & although I have made several other dovetail layout gauges in different styles (seems like every second FWW had a different one in the early days!), that one was always the one I used. It suits me because I set out by eye, following a system advocated by Frank Klausz, and I usually use varying tail widths. By using the width of the brass as a reference, it's easy to keep the tails close enough to even that you won't spot any differences without a micrometer. My later versions are a lot fancier than the original, with brass wear strips inlaid each side and a flushed brass bolt & internal sleeve to lock the blade, but they are no more functional than my original ugly duckling, I have to admit.

There've been a few discussions on dovetail angles here & elsewhere. The standard line I often hear (& what we were told at school in the 50s) was "1:9 for softwoods, 1:7 for hardwoods". For many a year, I diligently followed this bit of dogma without question. Then one day I was setting out some very large tails & noticed how exaggerated they looked even at 1:9, so I reduced the angle & they looked much better. The opposite occurs in thin stock - you need to increase the angle to make the tails more 'visible'. So I pondered this for a while & my conclusion was that dovetail angles have little to do with the tensile strength of the material, & much to do with appearance. You would really need to experiment with every species you work with to find the 'perfect' angle for maximum strength, but the difference would be inconsequential over the range of angles we normally choose. The gauge above is intended for narrow to medium stock, hence the steeper 1:6 angle on one side to better suit thin pieces.

Cheers,

Ian

I just enlarged the pix of the two smallest saws and I will place them here a bit larger:

Wilkie small saw sheoak.jpgWilkie small saw walnut.jpg

Did you use the new method of shaping the backs? I particularly noticed how close the saw screws were placed, by necessity of course: A larger cheek would have looked out of balance on such a small saw. Then I looked as the screws themselves and certainly, on this style of saw and this size of saw, the flush fitted heads, and presumably split nuts, seem more pleasing in aesthetic terms.

The complete use of all available saw plate is commended. Excellent.

Regards
Paul

Another fine example of your craftsmanship Ian. Thanks for taking the time to post. Although I only have mediocre skills, watching your builds encourages me to give it a try and I have several of them saved for future reference. I don't expect them to be as good as yours but you have shown me that us mortal folk can build functional tools if we plan careful and take our time.
I was disappointed when you told us "last plane build" a few months ago and now even more disappointed to read "last saw build" here. Lets hope that there are a few "Johnny Farnham" builds still to come.

Tony

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

...Did you use the new method of shaping the backs?

Not quite, Paul. The She-oak handled one has a chamfered rather than rounded top. The Qld Walnut handled saw has my 'signature' spine treatment, a lamb's tongue transition from a chamfer to the more square top above the cheeks. Some day, if I live long enough, I'm going to have a go at metal engraving, but I think it might take a while before that happens.....

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

... I particularly noticed how close the saw screws were placed, by necessity of course: A larger cheek would have looked out of balance on such a small saw. Then I looked at the screws themselves and certainly, on this style of saw and this size of saw, the flush fitted heads, and presumably split nuts, seem more pleasing in aesthetic terms.....

Yes, on such small cheeks, it's a bit of a juggle to fit the bolts & keep it all proportionate. The domed bolts have 7/16" heads, which is getting down to the practical limit for the nuts, unless I used a very fine bolt size, but it's easy enough to use 8mm heads (with 4mm shanks) on the split nut style

I wax & wane regarding domed vs. flush bolts & nuts. The domed nuts are a little more bother to make, & need a 3-step hole. Drilling for the flush style is a bit easier, only a two-step hole. But I take Henry's point (in the patent application for the domed nut system) that it's easier to pre-finish the handle & fit the domed bolts & nuts & not have to re-finish after you've flushed the brass. Overall, there's probably slightly more work involved if I use the split nuts/flushed to the cheeks style, but as long as you get a neat fit, the flush brass does look neat, I think....

Cheers,

Ian

One point of order here with the dueling saws. Shouldn't there be two of them? And identical?

And does that mean saw making retirement just got pushed back even further and in keeping with government policy?



Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by tony_A

Another fine example of your craftsmanship Ian. Thanks for taking the time to post. Although I only have mediocre skills, watching your builds encourages me to give it a try and I have several of them saved for future reference. I don't expect them to be as good as yours but you have shown me that us mortal folk can build functional tools if we plan careful and take our time.
I was disappointed when you told us "last plane build" a few months ago and now even more disappointed to read "last saw build" here. Lets hope that there are a few "Johnny Farnham" builds still to come.

Tony

Thanks Tony. No-one is born highly skilled, I had to start from a low base, just like anyone else & I've had my share of disasters. Just learn from your mistakes & be heartened by your successes & you'll make progress, for sure....

Cheers,

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Ian

One point of order here with the dueling saws. Shouldn't there be two of them? And identical?

And does that mean saw making retirement just got pushed back even further and in keeping with government policy?



Regards
Paul

Smart-a... I was waiting for that. In a sport with non-fatal outcomes, I think it's ok to bring your own weapons.....

Cheers,

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Ian

One point of order here with the dueling saws. Shouldn't there be two of them? And identical?

And does that mean saw making retirement just got pushed back even further and in keeping with government policy?



Regards
Paul

Paul,
Are we trying to digress here.?
Ian has admiral hung up his saw making tools.
I just hope and prey he’s not moving over to bird houses and potted plant boxes in treated pine and fence palings.

Tho Paul do you think, if I sent him a saw back and say you sent him some saw plate.
They might just sit on the bench or !!

Cheers Matt.

Wow Ian, that's truly beautiful tools you build mate.

Originally Posted by IanW

Smart-a... I was waiting for that. In a sport with non-fatal outcomes, I think it's ok to bring your own weapons.....

Cheers,

Fine..Fine

This is mine:

Simonds Back and Mitre saws 008.jpg



Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Tho Paul do you think, if I sent him a saw back and say you sent him some saw plate.
They might just sit on the bench or !!

Cheers Matt.

Matt

When you are licensed to duel, the 007 in you will just have to come to the fore. You never were an addict, just a reformed one that is waiting to fall off the wagon.

Regards
Paul