Thread: One for the saw masters

PS- as Paul suggests the Mr Punch trademark was present in 1856 and the handle style is so close to other 1850s handles, I amgoing to think of the saw as harking from that era. The medallion worries me in this suggestion but it is a generic style

This would make it easily the "oldest" "modern" tool I own - I think the next closest is 1872..

Cheers M

Originally Posted by MartinCH

....Any else have an opinion on the thicker blades? ......

Martin, I guess I do have opinions, but I'll leave it to the audience to decide how useful they may be...

First, blade thickness (& here my experimenting has nearly all been done with backsaws, but it should be generally applicable to handsaws).
For many years there has been an urban myth that thin saws cut faster than thicker saws, all else being equal (promoted by certain commercial interests plus hearsay). I will admit to thinking along those lines myself for decades until I finally decided to put it to the test. I had 3 saws that were pretty much the same (same tpi & all rip) except for the plate thickness, which went from 20 to 25 to ~30 thou, iirc. Each saw was freshly sharpened & set, and I made ten cuts with each, for a set number of strokes. I was a bit surprised by the variation in the length of my cuts (I'm obviously not as good a sawyer as I'd like to be! ), but the variability was the same for each saw; I didn't need to measure the cuts and do a statistical analysis to see there was no appreciable difference in cutting speed. This made sense to me, after all each tooth should remove the same depth per pass if the rake is the same, the wider kerf just requires a little more effort per stroke. I think the variation in cut length was due to my not maintaining exactly even pressure although I was using a very "light" touch to let the saw cut under its own weight (or so I thought). It was a long while ago & I can't remember the full details (I posted on part of my 'trial' but can't find it atm). After more fooling about I think I ended up with the heavier saw (i.e. thicker plate, the spines were all the same so the difference was not great), going slightly further than the thinner saws averaged out over a large number of cuts, but operator bias made it impossible to be very precise.

Saw weight can be both a help & a hindrance. Extra weight does speed the cut with handsaws. Even though I've been admonished to "let the saw cut, don't force it!", since I was 6 yrs old, noone is perfect and your arm gets tired after a while (much sooner than it used to, in my case), & so my control of the saw isn't as precise as it may be when I start. As your arm tires you also tend (consciously or unconsciously), to force the saw a bit more to get to the end, which can cause a bit of binding & increased friction, which starts a vicious cycle on long cuts! A lighter saw is less tiring and allows better control for longer, but for the inexperienced, the more 'whippy' blade can be harder to control than a thicker, stiffer blade and there is more temptation for the neophyte to 'lean' on the lighter saw.

Tapered blades introduce another variable. I don't have any non-tapered handsaws to compare with my regular saws, but I have a couple of under-sized panel saws with non-tapered blades that I made some years ago. The big difference to me is they feel a bit 'dead' compared with a nicely-tensioned (& tapered) handsaw but I'm not sure if it's the tensioning or taper that makes the non-tapered saw feel 'dead' (my tensioning skills are probably a very long way from those of the blokes at Disston!). As long as the saw is sharp & properly set, there seems to be very little, if any extra friction (that I can feel) from the parallel blade in dry, free-cutting woods.

The conclusion I've come to after many years of mucking about with saws is: Sharpness & set trumps all! You can make a very big difference to the way a saw feels & cuts with a small change in set (the difference between too much & too little can be frustratingly small), and an even bigger difference with well-sharpened teeth which means getting the rake angle consistent & suited to the wood being sawn. There is nothing quite like a freshly-sharpened saw, if you get it spot-on (& I don't always), it's an even better feeling than you get when you sharpen a dull plane blade....

Cheers,

PS: Forgot to mention stroke-length as another major factor in sawing speed & overall effort. If you select the right saw & can adopt a position & hold that allows a full stroke that suits your arm(s) & doesn't contort your body uncomfortably, it will all go so much more smoothly & effortlessly. Short choppy strokes & poor control of saw pressure due to an uncomfortable sawing position will quickly take all the fun out of sawing...

Hi Ian ,


Yes sharpening is key.

Suspecting sharpening is the main issue in this comparison. The teeth spacing is identical between the Disston and the I.Sorby and both were sharpened by yours truly. I have two other rip saws both sharpened by a professional saw doctor, (he's closed the doors now). They are now sharpening reference saws and his sharpening was "crisper" than what I can achieve- but generally I don't notice the difference sawing. He did however put a small flem on on the rip saws (maybe 5 degrees). I did put a approx 5 degree flem on the I Sorby but 0 on Disston. Maybe that small change is what is behind the difference.

Note - have only ripped a short distance with these saws and if using the individually, not benchmarking, may not have noticed . Intend to add a flem to the Disston and compare again.

Righto -

put a small flem on the Disston and ripped again. Measuring this time. More or less the same rate of penetration - around 9mm per stroke though 40mm thick timber. Might be a small nod to the I. Sorby.

The I. Sorby does however have a nicer cutting sound and feels more positive than the thinner Disston. Neither saw bound while cutting. The I Sorby with is thick blade, also is less likely to flex if a stroke is pulled back a tad too far.


PS at 9mm a stroke int would take 222 stokes to make 2000mm cut or a tad over 3 1/2 minutes, not too bad. Unfortunately, never found a decent way to way resaw that didn't take an age

Supports Ian comment, it is all about sharpness and set.

I be game hear an put up my “Opinion, I just check if my passport is valid)” it’s always been the sharpens of the teeth an the set an too some degrees the tension in the blade that makes or breaks a good performing saw, I think people chasing other factors, such as the thicknesses of the saw plate, are looking for other reasons too get out of jail,

This is not too say I’m an expert or even a eggspert, but blaming the performance of a saw on the thickness of the plate, especially when we are talking about 20 tho too 30 tho is just chasing unicorns, granted when we get down too some of the dinky little saws I’ve made in the past maybe then, but then we’re also talking about tiny little teeth with all fun that comes with sharpening an setting them, are I feel better now [emoji6].

Cheers Matt,


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Yes, well, I've already said my piece, but thought I might add my old adage that it's also about what you get used to. I've got a couple of saws I reach for because they feel just right for particular jobs. Sometimes another saw that is perfectly adequate just happens to be on the bench & I'll be lazy & use that instead of taking the 2 steps to the tool cupboard for the 'right' saw. If it's more than one brief cut, I invariably end up putting that saw down & getting out the 'proper' saw 'cos it just didn't feel right. I'm getting too set in my ways!

But there is one saw I'll always get out when cutting furniture-size dovetails, it's a 220mm saw, 15tpi that I made about 13 years ago: D-tail.jpg

I'd made a dozen plus saws by the time I made this one & had learnt a bit about sawmaking, but it was still as much by good luck as any great skill that everything came together so well on this one. It felt right from day one, and we've grown together so much over the last decade that don't think I could cut a decent dovetail without it! I think I'd just give up working wood if anything serious happened to it.

So I thought I'd discovered a deep secret about dovetail saws & set out to convert the world. About half the people who tried it liked it, the others, including a well-known & respected w'worker, said "nah!" Took me a while to figure out why, but it's mainly about the hang-angle in this case. The way I work (having the workpiece up quite high where my ageing eyes can see it), a very steep angle on the handle gives me a comfortable grip with a straight forearm. That gives me an easy action & more intuitive control of the saw. Those who prefer to work with the workpiece lower like a higher hang-angle, for what I presume are similar reasons.

Different strokes for different folks......

Cheers,

Hi Ian

Nice looking saw, the plus of tailoring a saw just for you -it can be perfect.

As for keeping the right saw isn't that the point. They are very easy to reach for and switch torso it entirely sensible to pick the one that is optimal for the job. Some saws end up very specialised. My Dozuki for example is the saw to reach for to cut dowel. It very light and mach easier to start of on the tiny contact point a dowel offers. Sure I could manage with something else but it more enjoyable to use the saw that effortless for the job


Diverting

Interesting too the transformation of saw handles the early ones have a large hump to suit two handed use. By the final saw the no provision at all for a second hand to grip. I can understand how the transformation happened - ripping has slowly became less of a requirement or simply there was a strong preference to keep one hand free. Then over time the two hand holds were forgotten. Speaking for myself have I never tried at reverse direction two hand grip like I starting doing, is entirely new to me, but I reckon my I.sorby saw was use this way many time. It comfortable in two hand near vertical grip.

You can see in the my old 1917 carpentry handbook they are showing a one handed position for ripping. It tough on the elbow the one handed style , two handed engages the shoulders. There may that complain ripping is too hard so something useful was lost.

IMG_6412.jpg

Cheers M

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Martin



I think your saw was an export model and typically it featured three crowns, as in the ceremonial headgear, in conjunction with a kangarooSNIP
Regards
Paul

Bear one thing in mind. This is a very recent immigrant country (We're all immigrants, except the indigenous obviously) and we all brought out as much %^&* as we could carry... It may not be an "export" saw. It may be a domestic saw that was carted out by an immigrant. I've got a few tools that were definitely not imported to Australia, so they had to have been brought in as personal belongings.