Thread: Saw set types

Originally Posted by woodPixel

SO! All this excitement over Saw Sets, which should one buy?

I looked around and the Saw tooth setter Eclipse Professional seems best, but occasionally reviews VERY poorly on places like Amazon. The build quality is apparently terrible.

One of these second hand marvels discussed here?

Apologies for hijacking this thread, but all this talk of saw sets has me excited to sharpen a few saws

An Eclipse 77 from EBay would not be a bad start, a lot of us started with one of those, before we fell down rabbit holes.

There’s a few on EBay at present.
But it would help too guide you more if we know what saws you want too sharpen?.

But a 77 will do most common garden variate Backsaws.

An if you really get excited about bending saw teeth you will end up with more than one saw set[emoji6].


Cheers Matt.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

WP

A digression of this magnitude could become a saw point.

Regards
Paul

Un supervised again on the Net Paul [emoji3064][emoji3064].

Cheers Matt.

WP. I agree with Matt. The Eclipse are usually priced pretty reasonably but I was very interesred in IanW and Busmillers discussion about where they set their saws. I always do mine in the vice so should find the Stanley style better. I will have to compare.

I must also find my plastic saw set and post a photo.

Here is one to embarrass me.

I've had this pair in the tool box for a minimum of 30 years (went and had a dig Just In Case!)

Probably used only a few times. There was a lot of wear on the hammer part, but a quick file made that smooth. Seemed to me that the "metal" was quite soft.

Probably an el-cheapo set at the time and long forgotten.

Thanks for everyone's feedback

I'm going to hunt for a good 77. The saws are simply the Veritas carcass/tenon sets in cross and rip. I dont have anything "big" yet...

IMG_20220812_163730.jpg IMG_20220812_163740.jpg

WP

I thought it might be wise to remind you that the numbers on the anvil do not relate to the ppi of any saw. They are merely a reference so that when you find a setting with which you are comfortable you can return to the same number. If only they did coincide with the ppi! This incidentally is true of all saw sets; Just a reference point.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by IanW

Relax, WP, I only have 3, all of which get used regularly (in fact I used one today). I long since gave away/traded the extras.....

Cheers,

I've got one of Ian's giveaways: a Somax 250. Though I've collected three more since then, the Somax remains the best performer for tenon & back saws ≥ 15 tpi. I suspect it's because the hammer has had treatment at Ian's barbery.
IMG_20220810_201353518.jpg

I was excited to find a red-top Eclipse 77, supposedly designed for fine teeth. Hence surprised to find that the hammer's thicker than the modified Somax and doesn't seem to work as well on the tenon & back saws. The thickness of the hammer is ~2.5 mm including the chamfers, which appears to be far thicker compared to the hammers on photographs of similar saw sets from Google search. Could've been a Frankenset?
IMG_20220810_201413939.jpg

Here's a side by side comparison. Modified Somax on the left and Eclipse on the right. The hammer is obviously thicker on the Eclipse, though not as pronounced at the tip.
Both.jpg

A few more junkyard find, one is a pistol grip variety of unknown make. The hammer is quite large, probably more suited to a saws with larger teeth.
IMG_20220810_201441879.jpgIMG_20220810_201506585.jpg

Thanks to Paul' (Bushmiller) catalogue, the last set is no longer a mystery. "MONARCH" is embossed on one of the inner handles, but no sign of Disston mark to be found. Based on the hammer size, it's probably a Size 12 for larger saws?
Monarch.jpgIMG_20220810_201654140.jpg

Three saw sets suitable for hand saws for the two hand saws in my collection. Too many saw sets or not enough hand saws??

Cheers,
Andy

Originally Posted by Andy_B

..... Three saw sets suitable for hand saws for the two hand saws in my collection. Too many saw sets or not enough hand saws??...

Ah, well, that's a conundrum only you can solve...

Andy, I imagine the set you got from me is one I'd modified, I seem to remember at the time you were into backsaws & small teeth & hadn't drifted into handsaws yet, so it would have made sense to give you one suited for that genre.

I suspect a good proportion of the old saw-sets still in circulation have had their hammers modified. The 77 I found in my dad's shed was definitely as it left the factory, it had the original machine marks on the sides of the bevel - one of the few I've seen that I've been certain hadn't been modified or 'touched-up'. It was way too fat for anything finer than round 8tpi, imo.

I doubt you will find an Eclipse any big improvement on the Somax. By all means keep your eyes peeled for any good ones that come up at flea markets etc., they are often available for next to nothing, probably because so few folks nowadays know what they are. The old brass types are perhaps more solid & robust than the alloy Somaxes (& definitely superior to plactic! ), but if it's an ancient one, be careful of wear in the 'yoke' caused by being dragged along tooth-tops, as discussed above. And as I said, the weakest point on many of the 77s I've seen is the anvil that the tooth is bent against. The old (pre-1960s) Eclipses had nicely-machined bevels forming an evenly-increasing width, & seem a bit harder, so if you find one of those in good shape, grab it with glee (price being amenable). Later models don't seem to have as well-made anvils as the earlier ones, the bevel is often uneven & can be very rough if the set has been heavily used. The Somax anvil is the least regular of the three 77 types I have, and it is plated, which is starting to wear & peel a bit in the spots where it gets most used, but it still does the job.

Don't worry too much about stiff or stuck plungers (other than to knock a few more $$s off the asking price, perhaps ). The internal gubbins is well-protected from rust by oil, but 50 years worth of dirt & sawdust mixed with it doesn't improve the action. A good clean & some nice, fresh oil & they are soon as good as new..

For a home-sharpener, just about any saw-set that works like it should will be fine. I sharpen more saws than the average amateur, and I reckon my sets will last through a couple more generations of similar use after I'm done with them....

Cheers,
ian

As promised,

A comparison between the Stanley 42X an the Atlas.










Straight off the Castings of the Stanley are kilometres(miles for the Oldies) ahead of the Atlas, the Atlas looks like they used the moulds from the Stanley after Stanley had knocked out few hundred thousand, an haven’t done any thing too the moulds.

There’s casting flash still on the Atlas also, I can’t seem to figure out if Atlas were deliberately trying to put a groove for the saw too run in or its just a seriously S… casting.

The example i had needed the Anvil touching up with a Stone to too get it running nicely through the Plunger slot also.

But the Atlas works, it does what it’s designed too, just as well as my Stanley one, an there are few Atlas saw sets on EBay at present.

My Atlas is cast Brass, but there seems too be a Aluminium one there as well for around the $30 Au plus postage.

ATLAS BRASS PISTOL GRIP SAW SET | eBay

Vintage Atlas Pistol Grip Saw Set Woodworking Carpenters Old Tools | eBay

We’re a Stanley 42X is pushing well past the Au$100 plus mark now, my Stanley was a Family gift, an was about $150 landed from American.

So quite a bit of difference with $$$$$ I haven’t used the Stanley hardly at all so far but it does feel more comfortable in the hand compared too the Atlas, an that is a big consideration if your setting a few saws at a time.
But that could be also that it just fits my hand size better(I don’t have huge hands).

Cheers Matt.

Matt,

I reckon I have an example of the Atlas saw set in my collection but, as you have alluded to it is not a very good example of that design at all.....

Graham.

Hi all. Please see below, for your amusement

Yes it's a #77
20220814_160704.jpg

Yes it's plastic
20220814_160711.jpg

And a lovely shade of blue
20220814_160634.jpg

For those who are worried that I might have been duped, I bought this along with the one I wanted for a very reasonable sum of $7.50 (for the two of them). This was advertised as a vintage eclipse 77.

Originally Posted by Mountain Ash

Hi all. Please see below, for your amusement

Yes it's a #77
20220814_160704.jpg

Yes it's plastic
20220814_160711.jpg

And a lovely shade of blue
20220814_160634.jpg

For those who are worried that I might have been duped, I bought this along with the one I wanted for a very reasonable sum of $7.50 (for the two of them). This was advertised as a vintage eclipse 77.

Wow,
Looks like something from a Communist county, not from England.
MA I think possibly your in the run for having the ugliest Saw set, hope your not offended.[emoji6]

Cheers Matt.

Interesting that they changed the moving handle from top to underneath. It might be more comfortable to use than the old 77s, Bushmiller for one finds the top-handle action not to his liking, but it's hard to feel any urge to own a plastic saw-set! However, I guess the proper question to ask is "does it actually work?" - that, after all is the important thing...

Cheers,

Hi Matt and Ian. I was hoping I would win the "ugly" prize, I agree it's pretty bad. I have not actually tried it, but the hammer and anvil seem to work okay.

Ugly? Hmm, I'd not thought of it as ugly, just very plain & very much in the "industrial design" style of last century where form was determined by function and therefore had its own beauty (so 'twas said). At the time it sort of made sense, we'd had the Scandinavian & Japanese influence, stressing minimalism plus a developing awareness that the earth's resources are limited, so paring things back seemed sensible. But times & tastes change constantly, so what may have seemed beautiful in the past is now perceived as ugly, the same way as some see Baroque furniture as ugly for its excessive ornateness.

I actually don't mind the simplicity of your little set, and am particularly intrigued by the way they've changed the action, which is why I asked about what it's like to use. Intuitively, it seems to me that it should be easier to squeeze than the older style 77, but maybe not - the only way to find out would be to try setting a saw or two with it. It looks like it has been used a bit, so presumably it does the job...

Ian