Thread: What happened to all _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Life happened to me.. I have moved and a shed was supposed to give me the ability to do some work unfortunately fixing tools, and machines and setting up the shed seems to be an endless task that goes around in circles and not producing any work. I did manage to cut a few totes and tooth some plate but no more finished saws to date.

There were very few from the workshop who showed their finished work on here but many took up more materials so one of three things is happening.
1. The first was so bad they wanted to bin it and make another attempt before showing.
2. They made a saw they are happy with but don't believe it up to standards shown by other accomplished makers on here so are self conscious posting.
3. The stuff is sitting on the shelf with good intentions collecting dust.



I would love to see the results good or bad.

I was on of the participants in the course and I thought i was a great opportunity to learn how to do it. I learned a lot and I also found out that I already had a lot of the skills needed, but just did not know how to apply them to sawmaking. The course was definitely worthwhile.

But ..... having gained the skills does not mean that I am going to apply them straight away. I have health issues which dictate what I can do and how long I can do it for in one go. I am currently working on making my workshop more ergonomically friendly to my medical problems.

When this is done, I will be able to do a lot more, and keep doing it for longer periods. I have almost completed getting all the machinery on wheels so I can position them easily without hurting myself, and I am in the early stages of building my workbench. Once these are done then it will be time to go back and apply the skills I learned on the course and make the handsaws I will need for the type of work I have in mind.

I have enough sawplate, brass backs and handles to make as many saws as I need and probably a couple more, just sitting there, well protected, not gathering dust at all, for when I need them.

So it just a matter of priorities. But hang on, I am going to need a big backsaw to cut the dovetails for the tailvise and the aprons around the benchtop ... Now what am I going to do first. It seems no matter what order you create your shed in, you need the thing you are working towards to get to the destination.

I also enjoyed the course at Holmesglen and did put a photo of my small dovetail saw on the forum. I have the materials to make a second saw but other things such as an 8 week overseas trip and health problems with family members intervened during 2014 to the extent that I did very little woodwork of any description. I have managed to cut and shape the handle and every time I look at the materials in their tray, I think "I must get onto that" but it just never seems to happen. Hopefully in 2015.

SAM_1219 (800x600).jpgSAM_1220 (800x600).jpgSAM_1221 (800x600).jpg
This is my unfinished efforts, the bottom one with the blackwood handle is from the workshop at Holmesglen, and the smaller saw was done at home from materials that Dale and Ray supplied.
I never did the finishing touches as I got a bit disheartened with a few aspects, such as countersinking the nuts as I only had a brace and bit which is kinda hard to get an accurate depth. I have since bought some forsteners and a counterbore but used neither on saw handles. The handle is some Drooping Dheoak. it is a 15tpi rip.
I have enough materials to do a few more thanks to Ron and Ray but havn't yet put any thought into doing anything with it yet.

Hi shedbound. Thank you for the update . Nice work.

regards Stewie;

Well it does take one or two saws to get to Stewie's level of sawmaking... I can fully understand how life gets in the way of these projects - even though I'm (supposed to be) "retired", there never seems to be enough hours in any given day....

The basic metalwork & woodwork isn't too big a challenge if you take your time (having suitable tools like a Forstner or a countersinking bit is a definite plus, too!). Perfect sharpening is a skill that doesn't come overnight, unless you are gifted with exceptional hand-eye coordination, but you should get pretty tolerable results after a few tries. I don't know if this is encouraging or discouraging, but I'll confess I still struggle with crosscut teeth finer than 15 tpi. They are decidedly fiddly, and my ageing eyesight definitely doesn't help!

But it's hard to make a complete mess, because almost everything can be re-done or re-visited & improved as your skill increases. Even your first saw should cut ok, and there's nothing quite like the feeling of using tools you've made for yourself, imo. Or the convenience of custom-making a saw for a specific purpose. So don't rush it, stick at it, & you'll eventually get where you'd like to be....

Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

Well it does take one or two saws to get to Stewie's level of sawmaking... I can fully understand how life gets in the way of these projects - even though I'm (supposed to be) "retired", there never seems to be enough hours in any given day....

The basic metalwork & woodwork isn't too big a challenge if you take your time (having suitable tools like a Forstner or a countersinking bit is a definite plus, too!). Perfect sharpening is a skill that doesn't come overnight, unless you are gifted with exceptional hand-eye coordination, but you should get pretty tolerable results after a few tries. I don't know if this is encouraging or discouraging, but I'll confess I still struggle with crosscut teeth finer than 15 tpi. They are decidedly fiddly, and my ageing eyesight definitely doesn't help!

But it's hard to make a complete mess, because almost everything can be re-done or re-visited & improved as your skill increases. Even your first saw should cut ok, and there's nothing quite like the feeling of using tools you've made for yourself, imo. Or the convenience of custom-making a saw for a specific purpose. So don't rush it, stick at it, & you'll eventually get where you'd like to be....

Cheers,

Hi Ian,

A few thoughts on tooth count and crosscut teeth. I have joined with those who draw the line regarding how small to file new crosscut teeth. I limit the size at 15PPI and will avoid teeth that small if possible. 15PPI and smaller will be filed rip and will be used for making crosscuts if necessary. If splintering is a concern, before making the cut, score where the cut is to be made with a marking knife or similar tool.

I find that when I attempt to file crosscut 15PPI and smaller, my accuracy is not up to standard. I like to see what the file is actually doing as I file a tooth. When I file the fleam angle on a 15PPI tooth, it's a lot by feel and guessing and hoping. When I'm done with a saw like that, it doesn't cut any better than if I had filed it rip with a little more rake angle, about 10 degrees.

Originally Posted by MarvW

Hi Ian,

A few thoughts on tooth count and crosscut teeth. I have joined with those who draw the line regarding how small to file new crosscut teeth. I limit the size at 15PPI and will avoid teeth that small if possible. 15PPI and smaller will be filed rip and will be used for making crosscuts if necessary. If splintering is a concern, before making the cut, score where the cut is to be made with a marking knife or similar tool.

I find that when I attempt to file crosscut 15PPI and smaller, my accuracy is not up to standard. I like to see what the file is actually doing as I file a tooth. When I file the fleam angle on a 15PPI tooth, it's a lot by feel and guessing and hoping. When I'm done with a saw like that, it doesn't cut any better than if I had filed it rip with a little more rake angle, about 10 degrees.

Hi again Marv,

I have also found that higher tooth count saws often work better when filed rip, particularly on blades/plates that are 0.015" thick. The small teeth seem to become dull faster with fleam angles > 15^o if used on the harder exotic types of wood. I've been filing my dovetail saws with rake angles starting at ~8-12^o rip for plates 1" tall or so, ~12^o rip for plates up to about 2" tall and ~15^o rip for plates up to 3' tall. I've also made a couple of closed handle short blade tenon type saws having 0.015" that are around 4-4.5" tall and find that the more relaxed rakes prevent chattering, particularly on the harder wood species.

Originally Posted by rob streeper

Hi again Marv,

I have also found that higher tooth count saws often work better when filed rip, particularly on blades/plates that are 0.015" thick. The small teeth seem to become dull faster with fleam angles > 15^o if used on the harder exotic types of wood. I've been filing my dovetail saws with rake angles starting at ~8-12^o rip for plates 1" tall or so, ~12^o rip for plates up to about 2" tall and ~15^o rip for plates up to 3' tall. I've also made a couple of closed handle short blade tenon type saws having 0.015" that are around 4-4.5" tall and find that the more relaxed rakes prevent chattering, particularly on the harder wood species.

Hi Rob,

10 degree rake on rip teeth has been about as relaxed as I have done. The chatter is annoying, even more than annoying. I've experienced it even on softer hardwoods. Depends on the coarseness of the grain. The thinner the plate, the better and faster it will cut with the more relaxed rake angles, as I'm sure you already know. I'm at a point where I don't want to make a backsaw with a blade more than .025 thick. If I or a customer needs a tenon saw for extra large tenons, I'd rather use a regular handsaw and convert the teeth to rip.

Another case of convergent evolution! All three of us seem to have reached some very similar conclusions on small teeth. I certainly agree that once you go past 15tpi or so, it makes very little difference using crosscut vs. rip teeth across the grain in the majority of situations. You can often make more significant differences to performance by altering rake angles & set, imo.

This is not a new concept, I first saw it advocated by Tage Frid in a very early FWW, but being naturally a bit sceptical, I had to prove it to myself over quite a long period. For example, I used to use two saws for dovetailing, a 15 tpi rip for the long-grain cuts, and a 15tpi crosscut for the few cross-grain cuts. Being a lazy efficient sort of chap, I would often use the rip for all cuts, & eventually realized I couldn't see any significant deterioration in quality in any but exceptional circumstances. And what about turning-saw blades, which seem to be universally made in rip configuration? I tried making a few different styles, but found that 15tpi blades with between 5 & 8 degrees of rake cut aggressively with or across the grain, with no discernible difference in rate of cut & little if any, difference in blow-out on the exit side, compared with x-cut styles. But rip pattern blades are an awful lot easier to make & maintain than x-cut!

I hadn't really thought about the durability of 'chisel' rip teeth vs pointy x-cut teeth, but now that Rob has mentioned it, I can see that it could be an important consideration, particularly in some of our hard, siliceous woods down here. However, I think there are a few situations where crosscut teeth, even little ones, are superior, and one of these is starting cuts that have to be deadly accurate along a line. It may be just me, but I find I can do this easier with a (well-sharpened) crosscut profile. My theory is that the points slice in better, whereas the chisel points of a rip profile have more tendency to skate. I certainly concur with the view that small crosscut teeth are an absolute bear to get right. I've been known to file off & re-do a set of fine teeth more than once, before I had them to my satisfaction! I couldn't do any teeth finer than 5 tpi without my head-band magnifier, and I would probably use it even for a large ripsaw, these days.

As you are well aware, there are multiple factors that have to be weighed when deciding on the tooth geometry for a given saw, and some are in conflict. User preferences, the main task it is expected to do, and the type of wood it will be expected to deal with all have to be weighed up. For the wood, hardness, stringy softwood or chippy hardwood, average MC and oiliness plus any other odd characteristics can all have a big bearing on the matter and will determine the best rake angles and amount of set. But since few people will use a saw for just one task in a single wood species, it ultimately boils down to a set of compromises. I sometimes think saw-making is much more art than science!

Cheers,

Here is a saw I made late last year.

DSCF8190.JPGDSCF8199.JPG

I decided to experiment with the Glen-Drake toothing, ie with no teeth at toe and heel (12" plate, 0.020", 9.5" of teeth, 5° rake, no fleam). I don't have this saw any more, but on testing I like it - makes the saw very easy to start (16ppi which is past my eye limit I think).

I also decided to round over the top of the spine, except for the portion inside the handle. A lot of work compared to a simple chamfer, and a couple of errant cuts. I also squeezed the slot in a 4" vise - the biggest I have - carefully and it held well, and the plate stayed straight.

Spent a lot more time on this handle than I usually do (I like to see evidence of tool marks, at least that is my story and I am sticking to it), and I doubt I will do this too often. Probably 8 levels of shellac and sanding before waxing. The 1/4 sawn Silky Oak is pretty easy to muck up, but as I have quite a bit of it, I will probably keep on using it - I might even get bettter at working it. I finished the handle 1" thick, which pushed the limits of the saw screws a bit.

A few more in progress...

Cheers
Peter

Originally Posted by Heavansabove

Here is a saw I made late last year.

DSCF8190.JPGDSCF8199.JPG

I decided to experiment with the Glen-Drake toothing, ie with no teeth at toe and heel (12" plate, 0.020", 9.5" of teeth, 5° rake, no fleam). I don't have this saw any more, but on testing I like it - makes the saw very easy to start (16ppi which is past my eye limit I think).

I also decided to round over the top of the spine, except for the portion inside the handle. A lot of work compared to a simple chamfer, and a couple of errant cuts. I also squeezed the slot in a 4" vise - the biggest I have - carefully and it held well, and the plate stayed straight.

Spent a lot more time on this handle than I usually do (I like to see evidence of tool marks, at least that is my story and I am sticking to it), and I doubt I will do this too often. Probably 8 levels of shellac and sanding before waxing. The 1/4 sawn Silky Oak is pretty easy to muck up, but as I have quite a bit of it, I will probably keep on using it - I might even get bettter at working it. I finished the handle 1" thick, which pushed the limits of the saw screws a bit.

A few more in progress...

Cheers
Peter

Interesting, I learn something new every day.

Originally Posted by MarvW

Hi Rob,

10 degree rake on rip teeth has been about as relaxed as I have done. The chatter is annoying, even more than annoying. I've experienced it even on softer hardwoods. Depends on the coarseness of the grain. The thinner the plate, the better and faster it will cut with the more relaxed rake angles, as I'm sure you already know. I'm at a point where I don't want to make a backsaw with a blade more than .025 thick. If I or a customer needs a tenon saw for extra large tenons, I'd rather use a regular handsaw and convert the teeth to rip.

Hi Marv. As you would be aware within my own saw making work, I have never used of fleam on saw plate of 0.025 gauge or finer, instead relying on the use to use a more relaxed rake angle, an increase in the tpi/ppi count, and controlling the amount of set applied to make the saw teeth more compatible for x grain work. Saw plate above 0.025, more commonly associated with non backed hand saws, does require a different approach to the use of fleam.

Its excellent to see more of your presence on this forum site Marv.

regards Stewie;

Originally Posted by Heavansabove

Here is a saw I made late last year.

DSCF8190.JPGDSCF8199.JPG

I decided to experiment with the Glen-Drake toothing, ie with no teeth at toe and heel (12" plate, 0.020", 9.5" of teeth, 5° rake, no fleam). I don't have this saw any more, but on testing I like it - makes the saw very easy to start (16ppi which is past my eye limit I think).

I also decided to round over the top of the spine, except for the portion inside the handle. A lot of work compared to a simple chamfer, and a couple of errant cuts. I also squeezed the slot in a 4" vise - the biggest I have - carefully and it held well, and the plate stayed straight.

Spent a lot more time on this handle than I usually do (I like to see evidence of tool marks, at least that is my story and I am sticking to it), and I doubt I will do this too often. Probably 8 levels of shellac and sanding before waxing. The 1/4 sawn Silky Oak is pretty easy to muck up, but as I have quite a bit of it, I will probably keep on using it - I might even get bettter at working it. I finished the handle 1" thick, which pushed the limits of the saw screws a bit.

A few more in progress...

Cheers
Peter

Hi Peter,

Nice job on your saw. I see you located the hang of the handle comparatively low. I have found that the location of the hand grip in relation to the tooth edge can vary quite a bit and still allow for a good feel to the user.

I like the toothless space at the toe end of a backsaw. I use it on most of the few saws I have made. However, I don't see a need for it at the heel end. Wade does it at both ends because his blades can be flipped so his saws can be used as a pull saw. I think his toothless length is more than necessary. It's about 2-1/2" at both ends. I customer of mine sent me his Wade saw and had me retooth it without the toothless feature.

On this saw plate, the toothless length is 1-3/8".