Thread: Look what I found

Originally Posted by pmcgee

... use the back teeth on a crosscut saw ... and the finer front teeth on a ripsaw.

This bloke doesn't shrink from the 'draw-back' method of starting. That was how we were shown, but there seems to be a school of thought that drawing back is a sin. I think they were schooled in the same place that says placing a plane on the bench on its sole dulls the blade. Somehow, the wood of the bench magically dulls edges more rapidly than the wood you push them through. Just stirring........

Most of the info in the article you pointed to is pretty standard stuff, but I do query this statement:
"... the teeth on a ripsaw don’t angle backwards....."
I think our friend is planning on sawing lots of softwood. Most people ripping hardwoods will appreciate at least a few degrees of negative rake on their saws.

The more the merrier, eh?
" 7. Blade crown. Hold the saw at arm’s length and sight along the teeth. You should see a slight outward curve at the blade’s center. This crown increases the cutting pressure by putting only a few teeth in contact with the wood at a time. The higher the crown, the better."

I wouldn't argue about the amount of crown (or 'breasting', whichever you fancy) desirable, as I think that's in the personal preference sphere (I'm on the 'little bit is good' end of the spectrum), but perhaps he should've made it clear he is talking about ripsaws. I guess a breasted crosscut would work the same way it does for a rip, but I can't recall ever seeing one (though no doubt that's my lack of experience, & I will soon be enlightened). It seems to me breasting would be more of a nuisance, or of dubious value, in many situations on a crosscut, but again, maybe that's my ignorance showing??

He is pretty careful not to open too many worm-cans on this point:
"8. Balance. There are no absolute rules for good balance, but a saw should feel comfortable in your hand– not nose heavy or cumbersome. Make a series of sawing motions in the air to see how the saw feels in your hand."

He might have mentioned the angle of the grip & its position relative to the tooth line (the two aspects that give saws 'balance', imo), but he prefers to leave all that alone - just wave it about in the air & she'll be right!

To be fair, it is a complex topic, and perhaps the advice "if it feels right to you, it probably will be ok", is the simplest & best.
How subtle this 'balance' business can be was well illustrated when I compared my S&J & the old Disston I recently acquired. These two saws are extremely close in size, blade shape, handle shape & handle position, and hefted in the hand, the only difference is that the blade on the S&J feels a tiny bit heavier, but the Disston feels nicer in use, to me. I tried them in several cuts in several woods & overall, the Disston edged out the S&J by a short half nose. This surprised me, I actually wanted the S&J to come out on top, since it's in almost new condition & the Disston has fallen on hard times during its long life, & has the scars to show for it. I was thinking I would get it working ok and pass it on to some deserving person as a starter tool, but it's now sitting in my tool chest where the S&J used to hang....

My theory is that at least some of the difference between these two otherwise similar saws is due to tensioning - the blade of the S&J is stiff enough, but has a slightly 'dead' feel compared with the Disston. If I thought I knew what I was doing, I would have a go at tensioning the S&J, but I think it would be very wise not to touch it at this stage of my abilities!

Tony's saw looks to be in such good condition - no kinks, hammer marks or anything to indicate mis-use, and very little blade used up, so the factory tensioning should be still present & balanced - a potentially excellent user!
Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

I guess a breasted crosscut would work the same way it does for a rip, but I can't recall ever seeing one (though no doubt that's my lack of experience, & I will soon be enlightened). It seems to me breasting would be more of a nuisance, or of dubious value, in many situations on a crosscut, but again, maybe that's my ignorance showing??

You couldn't be more ignorant than me Ian - I'm producing it in commercial quantities and shipping it out over the internet
However I can say that the first US "supersaw" that I bought from the US was a Simonds 371 10pt crosscut and it was described as having a "full breast" - which looks to be only about 2mm or a touch more.

I don't claim any understanding of the why, how and wherefores of breasted vs straight toothliness. (hahaha ... try "tooth-lines")
Still hoping for some enlightenment on that front.

Cheers,
Paul

breast 001.jpg

Originally Posted by pmcgee

....I don't claim any understanding of the why, how and wherefores of breasted vs straight toothliness.... Still hoping for some enlightenment on that front....

I rather expected to be enlightened very smartly, & you haven't disappointed, Paul, but geez, 2mm - that won't win any wet T-shirt contests, will it?

While writing my post above, I realised I was on dangerous turf, particularly as I had forgotten that I breasted this saw, & even claimed it was for a logical reason... (It does work more or less as intended, & doesn't stop or choke up the way a straight blade might if used in a similar manner.)

The way I understand breasting to work on a full-size saw is because when we are sawing, our wrist describes an elongate oval motion. You can correct for this and keep the tooth line running straight, but it takes concentration and an 'unnatural' stroke. A breasted blade allows you to adopt a freer, more 'natural' stroke, but still keep most of the teeth in contact with the wood throughout the 'down' stroke. When crosscutting large planks on saw-horses, the same geometry applies, so I guess if you do a lot of that, a breasted crosscut saw would be handy.

Now, who's good at trigonometry and morphometrics? How do you calculate the ideal shape & amount of curve, given good old biological variation & the different lengths of arms, to say nothing of relative differences in the ratio of humerus to radius/ulna in individuals. I guess just plain old trial & error found something that most testers decided is an improvement over straight?!

I think I'll tiptoe out quietly at this juncture...
Cheers,

Originally Posted by pmcgee

Giuliano, the thumbhole design is - to my eye - nearly symmetric ... but we really need to hear from a leftie.

BobR - Logan Cabinet Shoppe - is left-handed ... Rip Saw for Sale – $125 Plus Shipping | Logan Cabinet Shoppe

and Matt Cianci says (about the Holden patent design which is similar but different)
"For what its worth, I have found the Holden patent to be far superior to the Disston patent for a number of reasons, not the least of which is greater comfort. That, and it is perfectly well suited for either right or left-handed users, which the Disston thumbhole is not."
The mysterious Disston D-8 thumbhole… – The Saw Blog

The thumbhole design was used by Disston, S&J, Pax, Atkins, George H Bishop ... and probably others.
Lakeside - which I think was the Sears brand before Craftsman. LAKESIDE TOOL CO THUMBHOLE RIP SAW + SMALL SIMONDS S (06/22/2011)...
I can't recall a Simonds version ... (starts drooling at the thought )

Cheers,
Paul

Thanks Paul for these info

Attachment 266360Attachment 266361

....but it's not made with a south-paw in mind.

Toby

So, why the double cove, for accomodate the right index?

Ciao
Giuliano

I would say yes.

If you are left handed, the handle was not designed with you in mind, as it is not symmetrical.

From HERE.

Toby

1. I didn't correct myself that Lakeside was a brand of Montgomery Ward ... not Sears. (Although they might have swallowed them up later?)

2. Toby - nice handle

3. I wrote about this - put up a picture from the ?1917? Disston catalog, but have now forgotten the details again ... the normal D8 (and #7 maybe) in 28" ripsaws had an extra large swoop to the hand-grip for the same reason - two-handed use.

Handle (Large).jpg choiceh1 (Large).jpg (That's not a D8 but you get the idea I hope)

On the non-thumbhole version the pointed index finger gets wrapped over by your left hand in two-handed use.
The thumbhole version is more comfortable to me.
Your index finger no longer points, but hooks into the thumbhole which also fits your left thumb.

I tried it with my hands reversed ... it isn't as perfect as the 'normal' way.
But it occurs to me that it would only take a little chiseling and rasping to make the standard thumbhole into a symmetric form by taking off some material on the righthandside of the handle.

It is an amazing design I think (the thumbhole handle) ... should be up there with the Eames chair and whatever else they used to go on about on 'Collectors'. And then when it is executed in beautiful woods ... Mmmm Mmmm MMMM

Cheers,
Paul

That is one nice looking saw. Hope you can bring up the etch better.


That must be a a real skill to sharpen a progressive saw and keep the teeth all lined up.

Originally Posted by DaveTTC

.......That must be a a real skill to sharpen a progressive saw and keep the teeth all lined up.

Dave, it's ok as long as nobody has done a really bad job & totally screwed up the tooth spacings. If it's in reasonably good shape, sharpening is no harder than for a regular-toothed saw. You just concentrate on nice, even, strokes of the file, so each tooth gets the same amount removed, the same as you would on a saw with even pitch. For major sharpenings, where jointing may be required, you will have the shiny flats of the high teeth to guide you, again, just the same as with regular pitch.

What I would find extremely challenging is to set out a blank blade to cut genuine progressive pitch by hand from scratch. The incremental increase in each tooth is tiny, & I haven't figured out how to do that accurately enough with my primitive technology. The only way I can think of would be to lay out the blank with a manageable increase every so many teeth. Then when filing the teeth to depth, you can spread the increase a bit to each adjacent tooth. It might fool all but the most careful inspection. One day, when I'm feeling up to the challenge, I'll give it a whirl.....

Ian,

Take a look HERE.

Bottom of the page.

Toby

Thanks Toby!

I don't have any current ambitions to make a full-size saw, but I would like to try out genuine pp on a smaller saw like one of my little rip saws or a back saw. So I'll certainly keep an eye on that site for when he posts some of the promised smaller templates...

Cheers,

Here are some smaller ones.

LINK

Toby

I have not sharpened a saw by hand since the 80ies

Originally Posted by TobyC

Here are some smaller ones.

LINK

Toby

Thanks muchly Toby - that's more like what I'm looking for. Will give it a fly when I get some time (in a year or so!)
Cheers,

Have given the saw a clean up and just thought I would post some picks of the 'new' saw.
The saw plate was sanded with 400 grit wet and dry with WD40 as the 'wet' bit. Was very little rust on there any way so it was really only a clean.
The split nuts and medallion were shined and buffed and the handle was lightly sanded to remove any marks and paint spills. How do you get paint spills on the handle of a rip saw
The handle is Apple so a fairly light and, dare I say it, boring colour. I mixed up some shellac and added some Mahogany spirit based tint to give it a bit of colour. Not quite original but I'm happy with how it turned out.

Handle.jpgNew handle.jpg

The etch is still pretty clear but I will try some blueing solution to darken it when I get hold of some.
Clear Etch.jpgNew saw.jpg
Just needs a sharpen and it will be ready to go.
Forgot to mention that the handle had a coat of UBeaut Trad Wax to finish.