Thanks: 0
Likes: 0
Needs Pictures: 0
Picture(s) thanks: 0
Results 1 to 9 of 9
-
8th April 2020, 06:01 PM #1Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
- Location
- Geelong, Victoria
- Posts
- 284
Sharpening large pitch crosscut saws
In another thread about identifying an uncarved Diston saw we drifted into talking about saws with a more complicated tooth geometry. These are very large pitch saws with periodic deeper gullets for raking sawdust. I think they were intended for crosscutting logs etc, but the tooth geometry is not as complex as some of the larger crosscut saws. Bushmiller kindly posted some instructions from his Simmonds saw resources - but these seem to be for setting and filing saws with dedicated rakers. I am not sure they apply to the simpler tooth geometry on the example I have.
IMG_1826.JPG
IMG_8181.JPG
This purely academic, as I really don't have a need for such a saw - his one came with a bundle of others.
I am wondering if this saw is meant to cut on both push and pull strokes, as the larger two-man crosscuts are?
I have tried searching the net, but can't find this particular tooth pattern.
Bruce
-
8th April 2020 06:01 PM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
-
9th April 2020, 12:08 AM #2GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Location
- US
- Posts
- 3,132
it looks like a variation on the great american tooth pattern, but am i correct that none of the teeth have any fleam? If there's no fleam, it could've been just due to the saw being used on firewood (where it may not be noticeable) for cross cutting, or it may have been a hand saw used to rip medium sized wood.
I'm guessing the former.
Rip saws crosscut wood just fine as long as there's enough wood to keep the teeth from burying themselves and digging in (it's standard practice to crosscut large sections of dry wood with a coarse toothed rip saw - like 12/4 wood, etc)
-
9th April 2020, 08:57 AM #3
I'm judging by the bench-top, but it looks a bit shorter than the one-man/two man saws we used back in my youth, which were around 5 feet long, but the shape, handle and hole at the end are otherwise the same. Your saw looks to be only about 4 feet (1200mm), which is rather short, but as I say, I'm just judging by what else I can see in the pic. The hole at the tip is for a 'peg' handle that you screwed in when you had a helper, or took off to use it by yourself. They were most certainly sharpened with fleam, since they were only used for cross-cutting, and cutting green wood - you had to be a tough customer to saw dry firewood by hand in this part of the world! I spent more hours than I care to remember with that peg handle in my hands, docking Stringybarks around 600-800 mm diameter. That was the size the old pot used to prefer for splitting fenceposts from.
There are & were several different tooth patterns that were popular in different areas, but those square gullets are a novel touch. I'd say whoever last attacked that saw with a file had not heard of 'fleam' and hadn't quite mastered saw-filing. Might even be worse than my first effort as saw-sharpening. So don't put any store by the current shapes of the teeth - I think they are just a rough guide to what was once there, which almost certainly would have included fleamed teeth. That saw has seen a lot of use (or the owner had many, many attempts to sharpen it ), there's a lot of blade gone....
Cheers,IW
-
9th April 2020, 09:24 AM #4Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
- Location
- Geelong, Victoria
- Posts
- 284
Yes Ian, you are right in your estimates. It is roughly the same length as a normal handsaw and looks like it has had a lot of use. I don’t read anything into the lack of gleam which only reflects the last of many sharpening. I noticed the rectangular gullets and also slight variations in the tooth angle where it meets the deep gullet.
Regardless of the last sharpening, it seems to have retained an excellent tooth pattern through a lot of use, so has been maintained by an expert.
l would be surprised if a second handle could be used on a saw this length but maybe the hole was made for consistency with larger models. So maybe this was a small handy saw for trimming up or tight spots?
-
9th April 2020, 10:18 AM #5
No Bruce, I was way out - if it's 'normal' handsaw length, even a monster 36 incher, it would still be about 300mm shorter than my estimate! That makes a big difference to my view - I'd say now that it's more likely the hole was put there by an owner for hanging purposes (a not uncommon practice). The resemblance of the handle to the larger saws is just co-incidental - it's pretty clearly a home-cooked handle. Taking a closer look at the blade shape, the skew is far from a typical graceful curve, too - I'm wondering if the whole thing is a home-made job. How thick is the plate?
Cheers,IW
-
9th April 2020, 10:25 AM #6SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Location
- victor harbor sa
- Posts
- 316
Hi Bruce,
just wanting to show a few more views of the teeth on the bushman saw I posted earlier (first two photos)
I think the last filer did a poor job at maintaining the correct geometry.
plus another European one man saw with similar tooth pattern (next lot of photos)
They appear to be filled for cutting in both directions, with fleam to the inside faces
and straight across on the gullet faces.
Graham.
-
9th April 2020, 11:01 AM #7Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
- Location
- Geelong, Victoria
- Posts
- 284
I just ran a tape over the saw and the plate is 24 in - 600 mm so even smaller than the standard 26in saws.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
9th April 2020, 11:05 AM #8Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
- Location
- Geelong, Victoria
- Posts
- 284
Thanks Graham, that gives me a good starting point (no pun intended). I will give it a go and report back.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
9th April 2020, 11:50 AM #9Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
- Location
- Geelong, Victoria
- Posts
- 284
I struggled a bit - probably needed a larger file, but I got by. Filed gleam onto the front face of all forward facing teeth from both sides. It seems to cut better but needs a little more set.
I am satisfied that this is how it was meant to be.
Thanks for the help.
Bruce
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Similar Threads
-
Sharpening and setting your own saws
By chook in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWEREDReplies: 21Last Post: 14th July 2021, 03:29 PM -
Hand saws - Crosscut vs Rip teeth.
By Roy66 in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWEREDReplies: 3Last Post: 21st February 2013, 10:05 PM -
Rip vs Crosscut vs Panel Saws
By jisk in forum TABLE SAWS & COMBINATIONSReplies: 3Last Post: 23rd July 2007, 10:21 AM -
Sharpening saws
By KristianH in forum HINTS & TIPSReplies: 3Last Post: 3rd February 2005, 02:29 PM -
Sharpening from Crosscut to Rip
By Green Woodchips in forum SHARPENINGReplies: 13Last Post: 24th November 2004, 09:00 PM