Thread: Hand tool revival

Picked up two old dovetail saws. One is a buck brass saw from England and the other little 7" I can't identify yet. Their having a bath tonight after Iafe my own split nut screw driver to undo the bolts. They will clean up nicely.

Have a number of projects on at the moment but feel a Moxon vice would go nicely with these

Sent from my TA-1012 using Tapatalk

They've come up nicely so far. Hand sanding up to 600 wet and dry. Next are the brass split nuts

Sent from my TA-1012 using Tapatalk

'Transformed' is probably more accurate. Very nice work so far.

- - - Updated - - -

'Transformed' is probably more accurate. Very nice work so far.

The brass is always an advantage as it restores so well compared to a steel back.

Regards
Paul

delbs

I am not really au fait with the British saws, but both Sorby and Buck have family dynasties in the tool making field and particularly saws. The Sorby families were Sheffield based while Buck families were in London. A quick look in Simon Barley's book shows markings similar to those on the backs of both saws. While Barley does not go into specific models he gives estimations of the dates. Both your saws are around the 1880 time frame and that fits in with the split nuts which were completely superseded by the superior Glover style screws by 1900 or maybe even earlier.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

... the split nuts ... were completely superseded by the superior Glover style screws by 1900 or maybe even earlier....

Paul, I guess you could argue that the glover style bolt is 'superior' in that it is easy to twitch up when wood dries & shrinks, and ony requiure a normal slotted-screw driver but it is more involved to make the sleeve nuts & requires an extra step to drill out the nut side to take the sleeve. The only real disadvantages of the split nut style is that when you tighten it after he handle shrinks, you expose a bit of bolt. That's easily attended to with a file, but does risk damaging the finish on the surrounding wood (if any remains!).

But are you sure about the dates when split nuts finally went off the menu? I have not seen them on any hand saws that I'm moderately certain were made after 1900, but I've seen them on (English) backsaws that I think were made well after that date. Any comment on that - am I out to lunch, or were the older style bolts & nuts used into the 20h century on some English backsaws?

Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

Paul, I guess you could argue that the glover style bolt is 'superior' in that it is easy to twitch up when wood dries & shrinks, and ony requiure a normal slotted-screw driver but it is more involved to make the sleeve nuts & requires an extra step to drill out the nut side to take the sleeve. The only real disadvantages of the split nut style is that when you tighten it after he handle shrinks, you expose a bit of bolt. That's easily attended to with a file, but does risk damaging the finish on the surrounding wood (if any remains!).

But are you sure about the dates when split nuts finally went off the menu? I have not seen them on any hand saws that I'm moderately certain were made after 1900, but I've seen them on (English) backsaws that I think were made well after that date. Any comment on that - am I out to lunch, or were the older style bolts & nuts used into the 20h century on some English backsaws?

Cheers,

Ian

You actually raise a couple of points that I very glibly glossed over. My belief is that the Glover style was superior to the split nuts of the day, but today that is not the case as you and others (Rob Streeper for example) have made split nuts that easily compete with the Glover style. The original split nuts were frail with a thin stem, a nut that was also quite thin and a coarse thread that only permitted a couple of threads at most to engage. You addressed all of those issues. Another point is that the frailty really only becomes apparent one hundred and fifty years later when people like us attempt to remove these screws. The original manufacturers were unlikely to have factored this longevity requirement into their designs.

The Glover patent was lodged in 1887 and features on many medallions, often leading modern day sellers to claim the saw dates from that time. It actually only referred to the patent date of the saw screws and was a requirement until such time as the patent expired. The American market adopted the new saw screws in a flash and it seems that the split nut did not endure much beyond 1990 in the States. This may not have been the case in the UK, and, like you, I have seen some examples that point to the split nut having been used into the twentieth century, but particularly where there is no medallion it is very difficult to definitely say one way or another. Was this a reluctant and conservative move by the Brits to adopt new technology? Again I don't know.

I can't reproduce the pix from Barley's book because of copyright, but the stamps on the back support the 1880 time frame without being absolutely definitive. On the split nut timeline I guess the jury is out and the foregoing comments are just my opinion not backed up with too much hard fact.

Regards
Paul

Thanks - looks like there is no certainty as to the actual date of demise of split nuts. As you say, conservatism seems to have been the rule with the Brits, they were still making wooden planes into the second half of the 20h century, so it wouldn't be all that surprising if saw makers were still using split nuts into the 20s or 30s.

And I agree, the early bolts were flimsy-looking affairs, virtually all I have seen, even off large backsaws were only about 3mm diameter. When I use the old style (they look more 'authentic' on some handles), I prefer 5mm bolts for larger saws and use 3mm only for very small saws where there is not much room on the cheeks for large bolts. But if the old bolts outlasted the vast majority of saws they were fitted on, I think they were probably sufficient unto purpose. The old brass seems quite a bit softer than the grade I used to make your bolts too, so maybe we've made a double overkill!

Cheers,

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

...
I can't reproduce the pix from Barley's book because of copyright....

That is not my understanding of copyright law, Paul.

It is certainly illegal to copy an entire book or to republish sections or extracts for commercial purposes.

However, I think it is quite legal to:

• copy an extract to quote in a genuine review of a book or article (even though that review may be a commercial publication), or
• copy a "reasonable" section for private or non-commercial purposes or discussion.

It is simply good manners to acknowledge the source of any copying.

• eg Photo, Simon Barley, "British Saws: A Collectors Guide,'' (Amberley Publishing, 2016) p.97.

It is hard to envision that posting a single photo on the Forum could be regarded as a commercial activity, and it might even help to sell another copy of the book.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

That is not my understanding of copyright law, Paul.

It is certainly illegal to copy an entire book or to republish sections or extracts for commercial purposes.

However, I think it is quite legal to:

• copy an extract to quote in a genuine review of a book or article (even though that review may be a commercial publication), or
• copy a "reasonable" section for private or non-commercial purposes or discussion.

It is simply good manners to acknowledge the source of any copying.

• eg Photo, Simon Barley, "British Saws: A Collectors Guide,'' (Amberley Publishing, 2016) p.97.

It is hard to envision that posting a single photo on the Forum could be regarded as a commercial activity, and it might even help to sell another copy of the book.

Thank you Graeme

I am ignorant of the laws, but in this instance I particularly did not want to flaunt anything at all. When I purchased the book I entered into conversation with Simon and I felt any transgression would be a "betrayal." He even signed the book for me at my request. In the past I have contacted an author or publisher to seek permission to reproduce pix (the Kenyon saws from The Benjamin Seaton Tool Chest for example) so it may be that limited reproduction is not only possible but welcomed. I may make contact as a courtesy. Naturally a credit would be given, but normally there is also something that reflect "by permission of".....

Thanks for the information.

Regards
Paul

Reproducing a portion of the text in a book may be permissible but any graphic or illustration in a book is considered a complete work of art so if you reproduce it you are not reproducing a portion of the book but a complete copy of a work of art and that is definitely a breach of the copyright act.

The author may not care but to be safe you should get their permission.

If they did not actually generate the graphic they may not hold the copyright so they cannot give permission.

Interesting identification regarding the saws thanks. Also wasn't aware of that book will look to pick up a copy.

With the growth of my restored collection they will need a home. Along with my interest/obsession with Jarrah I had to pick up this solid timber Jarrah entertainment unit.

Was made by a cabinet maker in WA and moved over with the original owners into Canberra many years ago. It's very heavy but I managed to get it into my workshop.

The two things I'm thinking of doing are making a base approximately 30cm up and lightly attach it to the wall. Then make some magnetic angled shelves for hand planes and other tools and holder on the internal doors as they slide out of the way. Even considered leaving the black swivel tray in there to attach the cabinet to as I could hang things on front and back of it and drag it in and out. Will play around with some plyboard dummy shelving to see what the best fit is.

Sent from my TA-1012 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by delbs

...Interesting identification regarding the saws thanks. Also wasn't aware of that book will look to pick up a copy....

You helped delbs make a useful addition to his library, Paul, and you facilitated Simon selling another copy of his book. Well done.

And delbs, my head is still spinning trying to come to terms with your photos!

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

And delbs, my head is still spinning trying to come to terms with your photos!

. Apologies, not intentionally trying to make people's head spin. What about them does that and I'll slow it down

Cheers
Nathan

Sent from my TA-1012 using Tapatalk