Disston No. 4 saw filing vise

I had never handled one of this model before so I thought that it may be of some interest.

Superficially the No. 4 is similar to the more commonly found Disston 3D vise.

Attachment 427969


It lacks the bosses on the upper face of the rear jaw that are designed to hold the wire filing jig.

Attachment 427972


The mounting bracket is also fixed, unlike the angle adjustable bracket of the 3D.

Attachment 427970


And inside is a bit of a surprise - it has a spring to stabilize the saw plate that can be seen in this shot down the underside of the front jaw.

Attachment 427971

The jaw length is the same as the 3D and the mass is comparable. It seems to lock up more solidly than does the 3D though.

600+ views and no comments. Looks like the web-crawlers/bots have finally overcome Google's search algorithm revisions from early last year.

Well I'll comment...

First, I've looked around a bit online and never seen this model. I always see 1, 2, and 3, but I didn't even know a 4 existed.

It looks very diminutive. How wide are the jaws? Given the size and the overall lack of bells and whistles, is it possible that this was intended for travel? Or possibly for school use, where something cheap is the ideal?

Cheers,
Luke

Hi Luke,

No, it's about the same overall size as the 3D. 12-3/4" wide jaws and about the same weight. It does sit a little lower to the bench than does the 3D.

Cheers,
Rob

Gotcha. Well with fewer features it likely was a bit cheaper I'd assume. Interesting.

I bought a Wentworth a while back that I really love. Mounted it onto a board that clamps into my vise, so it sticks up high enough to file without hunching. Between that and my shop made vise for larger saws, I'm pretty set, but that ACME one you posted a while back has me looking again...

I wouldn't say fewer features so much as refined and less complicated without going so far as elegant. The lock-up is tighter than the 3D and the No. 4 is clearly the stronger. The filing guide of the 3D is a waste, floppy jalopy. I'll post some pic's of the two side by side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rob streeper

600+ views and no comments. Looks like the web-crawlers/bots have finally overcome Google's search algorithm revisions from early last year.

---

Rob

Saw your thread this morning. I have long since had the opinion that not all posts appear in the "New Posts" section. I tend to become locked in to my subscribed threads, but eventually we all run out of constructive things to say. Then that morphs into unable to say anything at all and then I check the "New Posts." Then I go back to the "Hand Tools" section and it is where I find the majority of posts of interest to me. Consequently it has taken me four days to get here :rolleyes: .

Regards
Paul

Paul,

Not that I was lonely or anything, no absolutely not. :U

Now there've been 800+ views. I remember hearing that Google re-did how their search terms and web page rankings were calculated about a year ago because there was so much click-fraud. Looks like the scammers have figured a work around.

Regards,
Rob

Here are the No. 3D and 4 vises from the front. The 3D is ~ 2" taller.

Attachment 428242


Looking from the side the 3D holds the saw blade about 1-1/4" further from the bench.

Attachment 428243


The No. 4 has about twice the clamping area on the bench.


Attachment 428244

This is a Disston No. 5 vise. Many other manufacturers made vises of similar general layout. This vise is secured to the bench with two screws. A version of this vise was also made that had a filing jig reminiscent of that included with the 3D vise, see (https://timetestedtools.forumchitcha...-vises-8263084).

Attachment 428247


Looking down at the toothline it's clear that sloped gullets weren't anticipated.

Attachment 428246


The model marking is on the underside of the vise.

Attachment 428245

Haven't used it yet but this vise holds the saw very solidly, too bad it's not longer to allow filing the full length of handsaws without repositioning.

Interesting #5. I've seen these on the Bay site, but never up close.