Thread: Melbourne, Backsaw Making Workshop

Originally Posted by DSEL74

I think Matt has learned a bit from Ray over on Backsaws.net, I have spoken to Matt about his DVD and there were a few minor mistakes in DVD in regard to the order in which things were done, I'd have to back read all my email to find it. Overall it is a good outline how to go about things.

I too have watched that video. He fitted the plate and the back to the handle, holes for sawnuts and all then he tapered the plate by cutting a thin wedge off the top edge (I forget what characteristic of a saw that creates - still learning). and strangely it all still fitted together nicely, Some of his other techniques I thought were a bit questionable, and I am glad I attended the workshop.

Doug

The taper is called "cant." I have done this to my saw plate.

Matt Cianci answers some questions on the DVD here.

Hi Dale,

How much saw plate do you have left over?

Originally Posted by hiroller

Hi Dale,

How much saw plate do you have left over?

All the 0.025 which we used for the carcase saws has gone but I still have plenty of the 0.015 & 0.020

Dale I take some more if possible
Seems like u may have a metal worth more than gold at present

To avoid buying the wrong stuff, can I get a few pieces as well please?

Dale,

I have sent you a PM

CHeers

Doug

You guys sent me out on the internet ... and was reading this thread ... WoodNet Forums: Making Saw Backs and Blades, and Matt Cianci's DVD

It connected to this apparently very early (pre-Mike Wenzloff) method of backsaw-making ...

Making Saw Blades by Tim Hoff

Paul

Paul, riveting spines goes way, way, back (before the internet, even! ). It's an alternative to slitting or folding that's certainly worth considering, if you don't have the necessary gear for one of those methods. Folding may be the more traditional way to go, but it's not easy, when all we can readily buy these days seems to be 'machinable' alloys which are too brittle to fold in the necessary thickness without annealing a couple of times. It's also hard to get a dead-straight fold without an expensive folder. Most small-scale saw makers opt for slitting, which has a couple of advantages. The more compelling for me is that you can achieve a straight slit with pretty basic gear - mine cost me $25 for the saw & arbor, and a few cents for some hanger bolts & wing nuts for the jig. With that setup, I've slit dozens of backs, & it's still going strong. I've also found quite a few other uses for the slitting saw, so I reckon it's paid for itself handsomely.

If I were to opt for riveted backs, I think I would use a couple more rivets; 3 seems a bit sparse to me, though he was backing them up with epoxy. I would rather add a couple more rivets & give the epoxy a miss. As I've said elsewhere, I have had failures gluing brass with epoxy, and I can't figure out why. Mostly it's ok, but once in a while I get a very weak bond on the metal that lets go at the slightest provocation. I haven't been able to figure out why, as I swear I do the same thing every time, including sanding & cleaning the surface immediately before applying the glue. Yesterday, I had to pull a couple of things apart that I'd glued some time ago (~20 years, in one case!) & would you believe, I had quite a struggle to get them to let go - I had to chip away the wood from one part, piece by piece. There was no danger that one was going to fail any time soon!

Cheers,

Originally Posted by DSEL74

All the 0.025 which we used for the carcase saws has gone but I still have plenty of the 0.015 & 0.020

Dale, I will try some of the 0.015" plate if stock still there. I have been comparing the saw I made to other saws I have, and when checking the various thicknesses, I realised that the plate I thought was 0.015", was in fact 0.020"! Must have got mixed up. However the brass back slit is a tight 0.018", and I have not yet needed to apply Loctite; the interference fit is ok for the moment.

Ray, what was the thickness of the saw used for slitting the 0.015" backs, and the 0.020" backs? There is it seems enough give in the brass to fit into a slightly thinner slot.

Comparing the new saw (14ppi and no set) to some others (similar ppi and variable set) I realise I need to sharpen some of the other short rip back saws (both old and newish 8" - 10"). The new one cuts rapidly and cleanly in 3/4" crap pine right down to the back, around 3/8" down per cut . When I modify a spare Stanley 42X saw set for fine teeth, I may set the new saw ever so finely. To date I have not set any dovetail saws, and as long as they are sharp, they work fine - especially at the usual depth of cut of < 1". Of course steering is not an option!

Cheers
Peter

Originally Posted by Heavansabove

Ray, what was the thickness of the saw used for slitting the 0.015" backs, and the 0.020" backs? There is it seems enough give in the brass to fit into a slightly thinner slot.

Cheers
Peter

Hi Peter,

The 15 thou and 20 thou versions were the same, both slit with the 20 thou blade, ( that's the thinnest I've got) The tests I've done, it doesn't make any difference, but if you wanted to you could close it up in a vise. The 2.5 thou clearance doesn't seem to worry the loctite.

The 25 thou, was cut with a blade that we custom ground to that thickness.

Regards
Ray

Found this on another forum I was browsing today
Not sure if it is right or wrong to cut and paste

But it is very interesting reading regarding slit saws

My humble apologies if I've done bad
Matt

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Found this on another forum I was browsing today
Not sure if it is right or wrong to cut and paste

But it is very interesting reading regarding slit saws

My humble apologies if I've done bad
Matt

Matt, it is generally not a good idea to "cut and paste" from another forum as it potentially infringes that forums' copyright.

Much better to provide a link to the information, which doesn't infringe copyright and also provides your intended audience with a reference to where your information came from.

Woodruff cutter SFM and IPT adjustments

That way people can read all of the discussion, not just a selected bit without any credit given to the source.

That's a fair and relevant point
Point taken will be more polite in the future
Thanks for pointing that out to me