Thread: The Simonds Saw Story

Well Pac Man the plot thickens...

Look what has just come up on Ebay:

Near-Mint Clean 26" Simonds 372 Blue Ribbon Saw - with an actually blue ribbon | eBay

and

Mint Clean 1903-1917 26" Disston D-100 - Like a Mirror | eBay

Recognise them?

Yep..

s-l1600 (1).jpgs-l1600.jpg

Only now they are for sale for US$250!!

And the heel of the Simonds No.372 is still brutally ground off: No improvement there.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Only now they are for sale for US$250!!

Wasn't he originally asking for US$250? I seem to remember that price, but reading the thread it seems he dropped it when people mentioned the flaws.

I had thought that too, but when I revisited the thread I saw $200 so I thought I must have been mistaken.

It is a free world, unless the POTUS has changed anything further between lunchtime and the present, so a person can make a buck where ever he can, but there seemed to be something slightly immoral in turning around two purchases as quickly as that. I, however in a way do the same thing except that I have usually restored the saw and hand sharpened it in the intervening period.

My view is that the Disston D100 may be worth nearly the original asking price of $200, but the Simonds No.372 definitely is not.

Regards
Paul

I have been away for a few days down in NSW for a meet the guests, a wedding, a follow up brunch and a 70th birthday party. Quite a social experience for me.

On my return I finished up the handle for the saw from the Crescent Moon period:

thumb_P1020655_1024.jpgthumb_P1020656_1024.jpgthumb_P1020658_1024.jpgthumb_P1020662_1024.jpg

I don't know if these pix aid the identification of the timber any more. I would put my money on Beech, but am very happy to be shouted down.

Don't look at the table, which was a rescue from next door when they moved out. It was destined to go to the tip. the psychedelic colouring occurred when I spray painted my horizontal vice . It is a sacrificial top .

Regards
Paul

Paul,
Saw is looking great.
I'm going with Beech for the handle,
but only so I don't get off side with you.
Also, I quite like your new photo prop.
Heaps better than the back of the ute.
But just not as manly as the ute.


Cheers Matt.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Matt

I am pretty much resigned to that saw being Beech and consequently a No.10. I continue my quest for a No.9. I know you're out there!!!

The ute is what it is: A good honest no frills chunk of Aussie heavy metal. The checkerplate tray is the largest flat surface I have. Particularly if I wish it to be uncluttered.

The table, which is disintegrating before my eyes, is a passable alternative, especially if you have mislaid your glasses (again.)

Regards
Paul

How can you tell the difference between the 8 and the 9 can't make out the etching on the heel unfortunately - picked this up from the local tip shop for $12


I can see this turning into an addiction...


Full saw image flipped around as it was upside down and I'm too lazy to fix it again

20170319_135632.jpg

Hello Noddy

The fact is that without an etch that includes the model number you can't with the later Nos.8/9. The "narrow" No.9 looks exactly like a worn No.8.

Well done to pick the saw up from the tip. It's more than I have ever done.

Regards
Paul

Cheers Paul,

lets call this a #8 then

Originally Posted by IINoddyII

Cheers Paul,

lets call this a #8 then

Paul is noddy's screws, in the saw, on the wrong way? Ie put in on the opposite side of the etching?

Noddy is there any evidence of etching on the other side ?

Cheers stew

Stew

Thanks for reminding me. My last post was hurried as I had to rush off before finishing. The screws are indeed the wrong way around. This leads me to ask if there is a large indent on the correct side of the handle where the medallion should go? If not the handle may be a replacement and incorrectly fitted. The factories did make mistakes, but not that one.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

...... the handle may be a replacement and incorrectly fitted.....

I don't think there's too much doubt that handle is a ring-in, Paul. It's too crude to be a factory handle from the era of the bolts & medallion, so it's either taken off a much later saw, or user-made. If from a later saw, you'd expect the bolts to have been re-installed the 'right' way round, so my preferrd dignosis would be the latter case.

Given the remaining width of its blade, that saw has had a long, hard-working life, which probably included some severe trauma to the original handle. I'd judge the replacement handle to be the work of a moderately competent person who was more intent on getting the saw back to work than fussing over details. That would describe my old pot to a T.....

Cheers,

Ian

I'm glad you have mentioned that. I am unable to enlarge the pix on this computer, but the handle does look a little crude. Now, if there is no etch, the only certainty is that the medallion is a Simonds!! Having said that, Simonds is not so common in Oz so the plate may well be Simonds too. Noddy, any sign of the etch?

Regards
Paul

Paul,

Can you give us a little primer on the dating of Simonds saws?

Regards,
Rob