Thread: Mitre Box

Something I should have added before is that this mitre box is for use with a saw that has 4" under the back. Mitre saws were made in versions 4", 5" and 6" under the back, although not in all lengths, but the two larger depths won't fit this box. Also there is absolutely no need to put any downward pressure on the saw when sawing. The weight itself is ample being approximately twice that of a similar sized handsaw.

Regards
Paul

I find a grunt-powered miter box indispensable when I'm dealing with trim on our 1895 house. A lot of the trim has mitered returns, so you're cutting a mitered 1-1/4" piece of molding that will return to the wall. Trying that on a chopsaw will result in the piece being launched into a different part of the multiverse, where the natives will be confused* by the sudden appearance of a small bit of wood.

On a grunt-powered miter box, the piece falls over when you finish the cut.
---------
*In the worst case, it will strike and kill their beloved princess, and they'll be so ticked off that their physicists will be assigned to figure out how to break into this universe, and we'll all be killed by raygun-wielding aliens.

Anomaly

Well I could talk about the the Blue Hammer paint job, but I have unfortunately not fact checked that one, I’m also having grave issues with the bent Cloud as a stop, but this may be because I’m a complete an udder snob, due to the fact that I have the correct cast iron U shape stop with matching screw my Mitre Saw.
It’s ok Paul I push my self off the box [emoji6].

Cheers Matt.

I am intrigued by these mitre boxes and have seen a few show up. But I remember having owned one of the very cheap ones and never got any precise cut out of them.

How accurate are they? From my past bad experience I am now cutting by hand to a line and then fix inaccuracies on a shooting board or other ways.

What do you mainly use them for? Only moldings?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Anomaly

Well I could talk about the the Blue Hammer paint job, but I have unfortunately not fact checked that one, I’m also having grave issues with the bent Cloud as a stop, but this may be because I’m a complete an udder snob, due to the fact that I have the correct cast iron U shape stop with matching screw my Mitre Saw.
It’s ok Paul I push my self off the box [emoji6].

Cheers Matt.

I wasn't quite sure if you were pulling technology rank on me there for a moment with the "cloud," but then I realised it was a typo and you meant "clout." I did not pickup on it straight away because I didn't think of that nail as a clout, but I suppose it is a small headed clout. I will now have to make up something a little more becoming to appease your sense of right.

Stanley. in their catalogues don't appear to list anything for the stop so it may be that it was an after market purchase. I went looking in several catalogues. In doing so it seems the No.2246 was introduced about 1940, although that is not definite. This is from the 1941 catalogue:

Stanley No2246 Mitre box 1941.jpg

No sign of a cloud anywhere. Doesn't even look like rain.



Regards
Paul

PS. You have not spotted the anomaly.

Originally Posted by Cklett

I am intrigued by these mitre boxes and have seen a few show up. But I remember having owned one of the very cheap ones and never got any precise cut out of them.

How accurate are they? From my past bad experience I am now cutting by hand to a line and then fix inaccuracies on a shooting board or other ways.

What do you mainly use them for? Only moldings?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

CK

These boxes are pretty good. They would have been used for mouldings, architraves and skirting boards in house construction. In particular they were used for box making. I would draw your attention to the diagram in the previous post and point number 8. There were a series of indents with positive stops in the quadrant for multi-sided figures up to 24 sides.

Although the saw I am using has 4" under the back, the deeper models with 6" under the back would have been very useful for box making.

Regards
Paul

CK

I was going to add that another use of the Stanley box is for picture frames and that is true, but if you were framing on a regular basis the Marsh Mitre box is probably better still.

P1070584 (Medium).JPGP1070586 (Medium).JPGP1070578 (Medium).JPGP1070577 (Medium).JPG



P1070579 (Medium).JPGP1070585 (Medium).JPGP1070590 (Medium).JPG

I cut some mouldings I made up for a mirror and the mitres came out beautifully, but I should have taken more care when I made the mouldings as the profiles were not quite exact.

P1070581 (Medium).JPG


This Simonds saw was made expressly for Langdon, who were another manufacturer of mitre boxes. One of the anomalies was that in the early days the mitre box manufacturers did not make saws and the saw makers did not make mitre boxes. That changed in the late fifties in that Stanley "apparently" made saws, but I would suggest somebody else in fact made the saws for them.

P1070588 (Medium).JPGP1070589 (Medium).JPGP1070587 (Medium).JPG

That anomaly I alluded to earlier is still there and I have narrowed the scope now.



Regards
Paul

I use one for all my cut off jobs, but it's not as modern as that one Stanley 246 MitreBox& Saw That one doesn't seem to have the facility to fine tune the guides to get the saw vertical like my older one. I can't tell from the photos, but there should be two pointed screws in those holes in the back (the spurs referred to in the brochure) that can be adjusted out to stop the workpiece slipping.

I have a Stanley Mitre Box No. 2244A which I use regularly and find it to be very accurate. In my small shop the powered mitre saw is not set up permanently ready to use so I often use the hand mitre box when I just need to cut something small or only have a few cuts to make. It wasn't in the best condition when I bought it a few years ago so I spruced it up by removing all the rust off the feet and repainting them, putting a new wooden base board on, adding a thrust bearing to the rotating mechanism, sanding and finishing the saw handle and getting the saw sharpened. I'm very happy with how it performs, but yes, the longer the saw the better.

Hi Paul,

a very noice saw, with an extraordinary (anomaly) handle...

are they sloped gullets between the teeth??

Graham.

Originally Posted by macg

Hi Paul,

a very noice saw, with an extraordinary (anomaly) handle...

are they sloped gullets between the teeth??

Graham.

Graham

Yes and yes.

You nailed it. Simonds did not use handles with lambs tongues in any of their back saws. In fact their only saws to exhibit a lambs tongue were the No.10 and No. 10½ and only between 1900 and 1909. Gradually, with all manufacturers, the lambs tongue was phased out and I believe that is because it did not lend itself to mass production techniques.

This handle I made up hurriedly for an exhibition when I realised the saw I had earmarked for it was too deep to fit the 2246. The handle on this saw was damaged and I made a new one out of Forest Red Gum, but decided to depart from the original style: I am not sure why I did that. Probably because I do like the lambs tongue and the 19th century saws exhibit much of their character and finesse from this style.

The teeth are indeed filed to have sloped gullets, but I am in the process of re-filing at the moment as I was not happy with the way they turned out, although it cuts very well with a complete absence of saw marks as you may be able to see in the early pix.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by 62woollybugger

I use one for all my cut off jobs, but it's not as modern as that one Stanley 246 MitreBox& Saw That one doesn't seem to have the facility to fine tune the guides to get the saw vertical like my older one. I can't tell from the photos, but there should be two pointed screws in those holes in the back (the spurs referred to in the brochure) that can be adjusted out to stop the workpiece slipping.

WB

Thanks for pointing that out. I had not even noticed them before you mentioned it. I will have work out the thread pitch and see if I can make something up to suit.

Regards
Paul

Hi Paul,

did you also file sloped gullets on a Symonds docking saw?

When you are filing these sloped gullets, do you just angle the saw vice?

What degree of slope do you strive for?

Graham.

Originally Posted by macg

Hi Paul,

did you also file sloped gullets on a Symonds docking saw?

When you are filing these sloped gullets, do you just angle the saw vice?

What degree of slope do you strive for?

Graham.

Graham

This is the thread where I replaced the handle on the saw I keep in my ute:

Australian Docking Saw (woodworkforums.com)

Post#5 shows the teeth with the sloped gullets. If it were down to me I would call them angled teeth and the alternate deep gullets are merely the product of dropping the file down instead of horizontal filing. However modern terminology has adopted "sloped gullets." I also feel the the supposed additional gullet capacity may be a fallacy and is up for discussion. My conjecture is that while the gullets are deepened on one side they are heightened on the other side so I am unconvinced the overall capacity is increased. So it maybe it equalises out. Just a comment if you are considering this path. The advantage I feel lays more in the angle of the teeth.

Ideally, you would angle the saw vice to whatever you choose and then file horizontally. This is probably the easiest way to achieve a consistent result. Myball swivel vice does not have sufficient rigidity for my liking (and it is too short like most proprietary vices) and the shop made vice does not have that capability so I just drop the file handle down and rely on muscle memory. It seems that as the slope applied increases the rake should also be increased. This is why I said I needed to do more work on the teeth. The rake was close to 5° instead of 10° to 15°. Just angling the vice or dropping down the handle end is not enough in itself.

As to the amount of slope, I would suggest that 45° is the absolute maximum and 25° the minimum to be worth going to the trouble. I have never measured but I think I do mine around 35/40°.

Regards
Paul