Thread: Saw tooth setting tool

I have one (and a Somax - same style, a copy even) and it's perfect for the job.

Like MA, I have a couple of Eclipses and a Somax. They are simple & reliable and can often be picked up for very little at flea markets etc. The reason for having several is that I modified the plungers on two of them to better fit small & very small teeth. Their downside is the "top" handle does the action & it can be tiring when setting a full-sized handsaw. This is not good because you tend to not squeeze the thing fully closed as you progress toward the end resulting in uneven set. [For the same reason, try to place the plunger ("hammer") at the same place on each tooth.]

Many people prefer the Stanley 42x, which has a different handle arrangement they find less tiring to use. There was a recent discussion on saw-sets here....
Cheers,

In the US at the moment, the fashionable saw set is the Stanley No. 42, but Millers Falls made some nice ones too. For a while some years back, Taintor was the fashionable one.

Bill, I had to google Taintor to see what they looked like. I don't think too many made it down this way, I've not come across any examples in my own rust-hunting, though I saw that a local second-hand tool seller has one on his website atm (he does import quite a bit of his stuff from the US, so it's possible it came from there).

From the pics it looks like the Taintor is a cross between the Eclipse & Stanley (is that why it's called a #7; half a 77? ) The moveable handle is operated by the fingers as per the Stanley 42x, but the handles stick out perpendicular to the plane of the saw like the Eclipse. Might mean it's more comfortable to use than the Eclipse??

I'm sure any of these sets are capable of doing a good job, I think it's mostly a matter of what you get used to. My main reason for sticking with the "77" despite its somewhat un-ergonomic action is the way I've gotten used to using it. I like to sit at the door of my shed where the light is best, holding the saw under my left arm as I set it. That way I'm looking down at the top of the plunger & tooth-line & can see very clearly what's going on. I'm sure there are equally effective ways to set a saw, or even better, but I've become so used to doing it this way, it would be very hard to change my ways......

Cheers,
Ian

Most saw sets are built around a frame, usually cast iron or otherwise cast, that holds the anvil and plunger, with the plunger operated by a handle. It's been a while since I played with the Taintor (in storage, so I can't get it out easily), but, as I recall, it had a lot more moving parts and a somewhat gizmotic action, and much of it is fabricated steel. I'm not advocating for or against it; but someone who was, for a time, the Saw Guru of the Moment liked them. So of course I bought one or two when I found them at estate/yard sales.

In the halcyon days of saw production there were many saw sets around. Some were duplicates rebranded under a major manufacturer's name. Simonds did this for example.

Below are the Taintor and Disston's own Triumph. Disston's other set was cheaper and called the Monarch. The Triumph may have been the first set that had a plunger to hold the set firmly to the saw plate. However, it differs from the the Stanley 42X in that both arms move: The lower arm activates the holding cylinder while the upper arm activates the setting plunger. I have not really tried it, but although I think it would work, I also feel it is a little clumsy and has a woolly feel to it if we can attribute that quality to a piece of steel.

P1080477 (Medium).JPG

In this pic the Taintor set is marketed by Simonds as "their" No.197

P1080478 (Medium) (2).JPG

The following three pix are all Stanley No.42 sets and mark their progressive development. In the first pic the bar that holds the set against the saw plate is not adjustable.The middle pic is the No.42N with an adjustable bar by the knurled nut to contact the saw plate and the last is the No.42X, which is the one to get. It has a plunger automatically operated when the lower handle is squeezed. It is true to say that they will all work, but some are easier than others, which may only be an issue if you are setting saws a lot.

P1060124 (Medium).JPGP1060125 (Medium).JPGP1060126 (Medium).JPG

Simonds marketed the Stanley set using Stanley's number but no other ackknowledgement. The No.43 is a similar, but larger set, for crosscut (logging) and circular saws.

P1080479 (Medium) (2).JPG

The Simonds catalogues are from 1923 to give a timeline and their earlier 1919 catalogue did not feature either the Stanley or the Taintor.

Regards
Paul