Thread: Saw set types

A little information on Disston saw sets. From the 1918 catalogue:

Disston1918CatalogRevisedEdition_ saw sets.jpgDisston1918CatalogRevisedEdition star saw set and jointer.jpg

And a little more information for Picko on his Monarch. This is from 1949.

Disston Monarch Saw Set Instructions 1949.jpg

Regards
Paul

Ten $$s per dozen for the star-saw-set!

Any chance we could organise a "retrospective group-buy"......

Cheers,
IW

Originally Posted by IanW

Ten $$s per dozen for the star-saw-set!

Any chance we could organise a "retrospective group-buy"......

Cheers,
IW

What Colours do they come in?.

Cheers Matt.

Hi IW,

I've already got mine but, I'm missing the small gauge used when setting narrow web blades.

See photos below.

Graham.

Originally Posted by IanW

Ten $$s per dozen for the star-saw-set!

Any chance we could organise a "retrospective group-buy"......

Cheers,
IW

Ian

A retrospective group buy would certainly make cents.

I think today on the US Ebay they would bring in excess of US$100 plus tax, plus shipping and that is when they come up, which is rare!

Regards
Paul

Hi Graham. Does your Disston star saw set get much use? Do you find jt easier than the handled ones?

Hi M.A.

I did get the Disston Star saw set set up and tried it out on some it doesn't matter saws.

I found it best to have the handle off, plus additional blade support on either side of the set.

It took some time to get the synchronizing of blade movement by hand and hammer movement by foot

but I had good results after about the 2nd saw.

As already said, they were probably more suited to a commercial shop rather than the 'home mechanic' in old speak.

Graham.

I recently “won” a small pile of assorted bits on fleabay, one of the items is a saw set anvil from what looks like a Stanley 42. As I don’t own that model I can’t be sure if it is for it but I’ve taken pics with measurements, if some kind-hearted soul would compare theirs we may be able to positively ID it.

Free, would prefer it go to a “need” rather than a “want”

BDF43C37-8908-449A-8B11-3D82DAF621B5.jpg 732A439F-38A6-4E7E-AF65-9E990DCFA647.jpg 4F3A1EF6-28CB-43E2-8D8F-5819A553CAB1.jpg 8032BEA2-9D97-4742-A429-EE4C1652726C.jpg

Chief,

I would put $100 down it’s the same as this one.

This one is from my Stanley 42x
An my Atlas that looks just like Stanley 42x just a little bit ruffer around the edges.
Anvil is identical.





Cheers Matt

Researching Eclipse seemed to present a problem: Not nearly as much infomation as should be available. It is a company known for metal cutting saws as well as coping saws. The parent name is James Neill & Co Ltd from the UK, although I saw they had at least a Canadian branch too. This is an extract from their 1969 catalogue:

Eclipse saw sets 1969.jpg

Interestingly, it mentions that the setting plunger is heat treated, but maybe quite a lot as it is easily filed. It is suitable for use on hand saws up to 12ppi and 16 gauge maximum. The Nos.78 & 79 are intended for crosscut (logging) and circular saws respectively. The No.77 is suitable for hand saws up to 12ppi and 16 gauge.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

..... it mentions that the setting plunger is heat treated, but maybe quite a lot as it is easily filed...

Paul, did you mean to say "not a lot"? I've certainly not come across a hammer on any set that didn't yield easily to a common file. So if they heat-treated them, they must have tempered them back almost all the way to being annealed.

It has always made sense to me that the hammer should be no harder than the saw teeth - less chance of distorting them, though it's still quite easy to do if you place the hammer so it hangs over the front or back edge of the tooth. OTH, the plunger that clamps the saw as you squeeze the handles can be as hard as you like, though it probably isn't necessary that it be hard at all - mild steel would do the job, methinks. On my sets, the part I wish were really hard is the anvil - both my well-used Eclipses & the Somax are marked up on the bevel the tooth is bent against....

Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

Paul, did you mean to say "not a lot"? I've certainly not come across a hammer on any set that didn't yield easily to a common file. So if they heat-treated them, they must have tempered them back almost all the way to being annealed.



Cheers,

Ian

My awkward phrasing. They say the steel is heat treated. I should have said "tempering a lot." In other words, as you have said, virtually bringing it back to an annealed state. In fact for the file to stand a chance this must be what they did, possibly back to a hardness a little less than a saw plate. Could be RC 45-50, but I am only guessing. There may have been a good deal of marketing hype there too, to make it sound more sophisticated than it really was. deception, deceit hyperbole and straight out lying has been around a long time and not a preserve of the the 22nd century.

I read that James Neill gave up his accountancy profession to go into metallurgy. That was in 1889 in Sheffield, UK. In 1985 the derivation of that company bought Spear & Jackson. Some history here:

James Neill and Co (Sheffield) - Graces Guide

The first mention of saw sets is in a 1945 advert, which does not neccessarily mean they were not made before then.

Eclipse saw sets 1945 Adv.jpg

Regards
Paul

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

Originally Posted by woodPixel

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

WP

A digression of this magnitude could become a saw point.

Regards
Paul