Thread: Hammer setting saws

Pretty slick...

What's the tool/jig called? Is that kind of thing commercially available?

I could definitely see that being a superior method.

Cheers,
Luke

Originally Posted by Luke Maddux

Pretty slick...

What's the tool/jig called? Is that kind of thing commercially available?

I could definitely see that being a superior method.........

Luke, Google "hammer saw-set" & you'll find a wealth of different makes of hammer sets using the same principle.......

Pardon me for being a little sceptical, but the very fact that there are lots of different types of hammer sets and lots of different types of pliers types indicates to me that neither was so superior it wiped the other out. They were all around long enough for natural selection to have had some effect, and it seems to me that if so many survived for so long it indicates none were sufficiently better to eliminate the others.

Watching the video clip didn't convince me that it's any faster than using pliers, it took him about the same time to align each tooth as it takes me to align the pliers. And while I can see the hammer method could be very consistent in the right hands (I will wager London to a brick there's at least some learning-curve with them!), so are the pliers. I will be first to admit I had a bit of trouble with pliers sets when I started out. Consistency is definitely the order of the day, but in my experience, it's not so much in the squeeze but placing the plunger exactly on the tooth in the same spot every time. The squeeze has to be enough to push the setting plunger all the way home, but more than enough won't do anything serious unless you are Clark Kent. Of course there is some spring-back (as there will be with the hammer set), but you allow for this when setting the amount of chamfer on the anvil.

I guess there will be passionate advocates for each, but I'll take a fair bit of convincing we're not about to start another Tweedle Dum/Tweedle Dee battle.....

Cheers,

One of the things I don't like about the plier sets is that it's hell on my wrist. I'm not sure if I'm using them wrong or what, but by the end of a 26" 8pt saw made of oldschool steel I'm in borderline agony, if I can even make it to the end without stopping. I kind of see this as a potential means to alleviate that.

That said, it does seem like on a finer toothed saw it could potentially be very difficult to align the teeth.

Cheers,
Luke

Originally Posted by Luke Maddux

One of the things I don't like about the plier sets is that it's hell on my wrist. I'm not sure if I'm using them wrong or what, but by the end of a 26" 8pt saw made of oldschool steel I'm in borderline agony, if I can even make it to the end without stopping. I kind of see this as a potential means to alleviate that.

True, I guess I was thinking of setting backsaws, mainly, with only the occasional handsaw needing that sort of attention. But setting several backsaws in quick succession is noticeable on my wrist, I'll admit. I think if I had to set full-size handsaws all day, I might be easier to convince of the superiority of the hammer type, though your arm is likely to get a bit sick of whacking that gadget, too....

Cheers,

Hammer setting also distorts the tooth profile, try it and have a look with a 10X magnifier. "This tool and technique rearranges the tooth at the molecular level"?

I've seen a photograph, which clearly has information limitations, of a great grandfather setting a saw with an actual hammer. Tap tap tap. The thing looked much like a finer version of a bricklayer's hammer.

Great grandson reported family mythology that the old dude could set a saw in well less than 5 minutes. Tap tap tap.

Like everything under the sun, not everything is equal. Saw sets vary considerably. With the hand operated type either the top lever or the bottom lever can move. My experience is that the top lever moving is a disaster because the whole device moves. Ideally the saw set remains still as the teeth are set and this can only happen with the low lever moving and actuated with the fingers.

If we are only setting saws occasionally the unaccustomed muscle use will take it's toll. I expect If we were setting saws all day long we would get used to it and develop arms like Arnie or Sly. However even for people setting a large number of saws it is both tedious and tiring. I have been on the lookout for a Disston Star set, but have not seen one yet and indeed it may not be the answer. With the hand held sets they were made with different thickness plungers to suit fine and coarse setups.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

.....With the hand operated type either the top lever or the bottom lever can move. My experience is that the top lever moving is a disaster because the whole device moves. Ideally the saw set remains still as the teeth are set and this can only happen with the low lever moving and actuated with the fingers. ...

Paul, I haven't used more than 2 or possibly 3 types of sets, but the ones I've seen go to some lengths to minimise any effects of hand movement. The set I favour is the Eclipse 77, on which the larger plunger grips the blade firmly before the small plunger starts pushing on the tooth. The area held by the larger plunger is so large compared with the small area of the tooth being moved, the saw blade itself is to all intents immobilised, even if your hand moves, and all 'movement' should be restricted to the top of the tooth. As long as you don't do something strange, each squeeze ought to do pretty much the same thing, regardless of any minor changes in the position of your hand. As I said, I think the main thing is to make sure you give it a good, solid squeeze each time, so that the tooth is pushed to the maximum extent of the anvil/plunger setting.

Setting a saw literally with a hammer is well beyond my skills! My old pot used to set the big crosscut saws using a small ball-pein hammer, tapping each against the sharp end of a steel wedge. He made it look easy, but I don't think I'd have the nerve to try it - I reckon I'd end up with a rather weird tooth-line!

Cheers,

Ian

I wasn't aware that the Eclipse had that plunger mechanism, until I looked at mine! That certainly helps. If the saw set doesn't have this feature the whole saw plate wants to move under the squeezing action.

These saw sets all have the lower arm as the moving component from left to right, Stanley No.42X (it has the clamping piston independent of the striking jaw), Stanley No.42W and Keen Kutter (not Simonds as the pic says):

Stanley and Simonds saw sets 002.jpg

The Eclipse No.77 (early type in brass) and Somax, which looks like an Eclipse knock off, have the moving lever on the top.

Eclipse No.77 and Somax No.250 saw sets 001.jpg

I prefer the pistol style with lower moving lever, but it does have a limitation in that it fouls most handles which is why I have the Keen Kutter for use in that area before going back to the Stanley.

This is not an issue if the handle has been removed or not yet installed.

Regards
Paul

I purchased a hammer saw set from the USA about 8 months ago, still haven't tested it out. Not as fancy as Bad Axe owns.

Stewie;

There is a UK based cabinetmaker who has made his own hammer setting set up:
Richard Elderton Workshop TMC
image.jpeg

Saw-setting hammer and plates. The hammer and plates were made from alloy tool steel, hardened and tempered. The foremost plate is fitted with phenolic resin index blocks which are adjusted according to the pitch of the saw teeth. The plates are mounted on more massive blocks to absorb the shock of the hammer. The saw blade is supported horizontally on the plate and alternate teeth hammered over to conform to the bevel angle on the plate (preferably using one blow each).

It's important to note the difference the maul used by Bad Axe and the hammer in the above post, several pounds vs. maybe 8-10 oz. The largest Japanese setting hammer I have goes 194 gm, the smallest is 71 gm. The face of the Japanese large hammer looks to be suited for saws < 6 ppi and the smallest for > 16 PPI.
I haven't experimented yet with the setting hammers but I've used an Atkins hammer set driven by a 4 oz brass hammer (gently) on 0.015" 1095 steel and the teeth were distorted by the blows. Thus, a 4 oz hammer, even when used carefully, is too much for this steel thickness. Perhaps it's my technique or the geometry of the Atkins set I used.
Attached is a photo of my yet to be competed test strip. III - Hirsch 1.5, IV - Disston Triumph, V - Somax gold, VI Somax blue, VII Stanley 42X, VIII - Stanley 42W, IX - Atkins hammer, I, II and X will be Akens hammer, Bemaco hammer and Japanese hammer. Steel is 0.015" toothed 15 PPI.
When I get a few uninterrupted days to focus on this experiment I'll post some microscope pictures of each test.
Too many things to do...

saw setting experiment.jpg

Bad Axe have posted another video of hammer setting saws.
There are 2 saw sets shown. The first is a Seymour Smith on the small saw and the 2nd is a Disston Star on the frame saw blade.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BJO6NhmjlDG/

I recently picked up a Seymour Smith saw set very similar to the one on the video in pretty good condition. It looks like Bad Axe have set up a bigger fence and more of a table to support the saw.
I will add some photos when I get a chance. Still need to unlock it's secrets.

Setmour Smith went on to be known for their garden tools and lasted as a family business for 6 generations.
More info here: The Saw Set Collector's Resource - Seymour Smith & Son

Gavin

He certainly gives the frame saw blade a fair whack with a lump of a hammer! Interesting in the light of Rob's comments.

I can see that if you are setting saws all day long the hammer and anvil style would be less tiring than squeezing the pliers. But is it better? Yet another question!

Regards
Paul