Est. 1998 — 27 years of woodworking knowledge
Re: Handle material
paul womack
>Beech is really a bear to split.
I assume your beech is different to the English beech, from which various chairs were made using woodworking techniques heavily relient on...
...splitting.
BugBear (in the UK, who finds beech firewood easy on the axe)
Heres a real one....
Todd Hughes
>I found out under my coffie table[was wondering where I left it!]...Made by Barber & Genn a Shefield English maker that worked from 1797-1817.Iron Back is also marked German Steel. Even though maybe 200 years old has a very straight 14 in. blade with perfect sharp teeth [11 ppi cross cut], would cut very well I imagine though of course it will never touch wood again. Handle is fine as well. Never got around to cleaning up some but maybe I should ...oh well maybe some day. Found it in an old tool box at an auction and if I remember right do to someone running me had to pay the surprisingly high price of $25 which I thought was plenty enougn.....Todd
some old ones
Todd Hughes
>Here next to a late 18th century early 19th Barber and Genn [see below] is a rare mid 1700s saw made by the english maker Smith which has a very distinctibe old style handle....Todd
Re: Hey Adam? *LINK*
Jeff Schmidt
>Aesthetically, I personally don't like the front part of the handle (too chunky) as much as somewhat later designs (see link). At first, I thought that perhaps the bulkier handle was due to the longer length of the "tonond" saw, requiring more lateral strength in the handle. However, Seaton's 14" "sash" saw has the same pattern. I wonder if adding the 3rd screw allowed the handle to be smaller in this region? As I look at many later Disston miter box saws (ie long), they have just as much material in this part of the handle, but the 3rd screw seems to break up the "expanse".
Anyway.....your results are very close to the original Seaton Kenyon saws and very appropriate for the 18th century.
To get a bit closer, I would suggest that you give more of a continuous circular curve to the front part of that handle, and decrease the amount of flair at the bottom of the grip.
Great work especially with your limited tools!
Jeff
P.S. For those that would like a long tenon saw, but do not have the desire to make one, there are lots of reasonably priced Disston miter box saws out there that, with an improved handle and new tooth profile, could fit the bill quite nicely.
19th Century Handle
One more...
Todd Hughes
>This little dovetail saw is marked SKEELS London, haven't been able to find out anything about it but then I haven't really tried to hard. I think it is probably from the pretty early 1800s. Found it in a bucket of tools for $5 a few months back and was pretty happy ...Todd
Bobe Brode's Handle Gallery *LINK*
Jeff Schmidt
>Bugbear,
Mr. DuBoff's site no longer seems to carry the images.
However, Bob Brode does still have a nice gallery of handles, though not much from the 18th century.
Bob Brode's Gallery of Handles
Blade Thickness?
Jeff Schmidt
>Adam,
How thick is the blade?
Re: some old ones
mikew
>Wonderful pictures--thank ever so much Todd!
I love the look, but more importantly, the feel of the old handles. Something for us to continue to strive for.
Again, thanks. Mike
Re: Bobe Brode's Handle Gallery
William Duffield, on the Cohansey
>Curious. I don't have any problem viewing the images in BugBear's link. However, I don't find them very useful, as all the photos are taken at oblique angles, which would make it difficult to reproduce a handle or to compare hang or any other operational characteristics. Bob Brody's images are much more useful.
Re: Split screws, nuts & bolts
Tom Price
>Well, if you are saying that Disstons were sloppy in the fit of the back to the mortise in the handle or the blade was a loose fit in the slot, then I don't agree. My, ahem, several Disston backsaws of 12" or greater are rather tight in this respect and have 3 bolts. The bolts themselves are a pretty tight fit. So at least DISSTON thought three bolts were necessary on backsaws of 12" or greater (at least in their first-line saws).
- Tom
Question Concerning Tenon Saw
Patrick Gibbons, Houston, TX
>Making larger tenons shows how a 14" or even a 16" saw is too short. Once I substituted a short panel saw for the crosscut. The saw blade was about 17" long. Without a back the saw was lighter to use than my 14" back saw but not so light that it didn't do the job just fine. The blade was stiff and performed quite nicely without a back. It made me wonder if a half-back saw of the following description might be an ideal tenon saw: 18" length with a blade thickness akin to a rip saw's dimensions with 8ppi rip and a blade shape that is boxier than the half-back saw Disston made and a handle angled such that the business end of the saw can be kept to a straight line. Am I reinventing the wheel (or in this case the saw) or does anyone else see merit in my musings?
Curious Indeed
Jeff Schmidt
>That's funny. I tried viewing that page with both Firefox and Borg Internet Explorer and neither approach showed any images. I am assuming that the images are on the actual page that Bugbear linked to?
Some Details
Patrick Gibbons, Houston, TX
>In my post above, I forgot to explain my thoughts. An 18" back saw is heavy to negotiate accurately, at least for me it is. A half-back coupled with a thicker and wider blade would provide enough stiffness without so much heft. A larger, well-made handle would also go a long way towards improved accuracy. I believe Disston cited improved joint making capabilities for its half-back saws.
Re: Large Tenon saw
Skip in Falls Church
>Hi Mike,
What a beautiful saw!!! As I struggle to learn saw making myself, this whole thread has been very interesting. Especially the conversations and pictures of the handles. I fitted my first brass back to a protoblade just yesterday and I'm shaping the handle today.
It seems to me (as someone learning) that the steel and the backs of backsaws are pretty much equal between saws - the important parts are the toothing (okay, that's pretty obvious) and the handle's hang and comfort. In comparison to handles it seems there are volumes of information on sharpening, it seems that if you're making a saw that there isn't a lot of information (at least all in one place) about handle design.
Skip
Re: Some Details
Todd Hughes
>Looking in my old original Disston catalog they said the no.8 half back saw..."Combined the advantages of a Hand Saw and a Back saw" ....Don't think they were ever promoted as being better then either saw at a particular job but rather more of a multipurpose saw. Judging by the large number I don't see I think most wood workers were more happy to buy a regular backsaw and a regular hand saw instead of such a combination tool.......Todd
Re: Question Concerning Tenon Saw *LINK*
mikew
>Hi Patrick,
Making larger tenons shows how a 14" or even a 16" saw is too short...It made me wonder if a half-back saw of the following description might be an ideal tenon saw: 18" length with a blade thickness akin to a rip saw's dimensions with 8ppi rip..."
Kinda like this one:
We make these to order, so dimensions and toothing changes is of little consequence. I would think that perhaps 8 ppi rip might be a tad coarse for all but the larger work, unless one relaxes the rake angle, at least at the toe.
Price list is at the link.
Take care, Mike
Saw Price list
Re: Large Tenon saw
mikew
>Hi Skip,
Thank you for the compliment.
Handle hang and perhaps design is near and dear to me--how else do you think I justified obtaining all the saws I have Feel free to email me if you have any questions. Take care, Mike
Please...why assume the negative first?
HC Sakman
>I was saying 2 is enuf if blade and handle are very good fit; If the fit is less than perfect, 3 bolt fixing is becomes necessity. I didn't say anything about Disston or anything else.
That's all.
Chico...
As a matter of fact...Since we've the maker here..
HC Sakman
>...let's hear from Mike hiself why he used 2 bolts.
Chico...
Duh..
HC Sakman
>..Mike, sorry you already replied. I didn't see it in this cherry orchard! ;-)
Chico...
Re: Please...why assume the negative first?
Todd Hughes
>I think tradtionaly the reason some saws had only two nuts was probably a cost saving thing that and could be hard to cut the slot in some handles by hand so that you could use more then 2 nuts. In my experance it was tradtionaly lower priced saws that had the fewer nuts and certainly not higher priced better made saws.Actually lots of people judge how good a saw is with how many nuts are in the handle [more the better] though I wouldn't go that far as there are many other variables.....Just talking tradtionaly now ....Todd
Re: Some Details
Patrick Gibbons, Houston, TX
>I guess that's true Todd if you're talking about wanting a hand saw or a back saw but I'm musing about a saw specifically for tenons, a saw that Adam has said hasn't really been common since the 18th century. I wonder if those tenon saws that Adam talked about were as heavy as an 18" back saw. Once again, I find that the heft of a saw becomes counterproductive to accuracy after a certain point. However, you're right about the half-back. They don't appear to have been popular though Disston did make them for over 50 years.
Re: I'm using mozilla...
paul womack
>That's funny. I tried viewing that page with both Firefox and Borg Internet Explorer and neither approach showed any images. I am assuming that the images are on the actual page that Bugbear linked to?
Well, I can see them. I assumed others could.
(tippety-tap)
Works In konqueror too.
My Linux doesn't run Explorer :-)
Bob Brodes are also good (his site was down for a while, so I haven't been there recently)
BugBear
Re: I'm using mozilla...
Jeff Schmidt
>I think it was a problem in my firewall. A re-boot of Borg XP did the trick. One of these days I will have to go the galootish route with Linux.
Nice saws!
Paul in NJ
>Adam and Mike,
Your saws are just stunning! Both of you have mentioned a variable pitch and ppi for the first couple of inches. I believe this is to help with staring of the saw, especially if you try to bisect the corner for accuracy. I would like to re-tooth and file a long miter box saw I have but I'm not sure how to layout the variable ppi. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I was also curious about the thickness of your large tenon saws. I think my tenon saw measures .035 inches, it seems a little thick. Maybe to avoid deflection on small cut-offs? My full size rips and x-cuts measure about the same at the tooth line. Thank you gentlemen for posting the nice pictures. That includes you too Todd!
Paul Dzioba