Large Tenon saw

yes

Adam Cherubini

>

Re: Long haul

Adam Cherubini

>Hi Tom,

I totally get your point. I'm unwilling to dismiss out of hand some traditional feature. It may be that the slot they cut in the handle was too inaccurate to provide any support, so a third screw was added. It could also be that the extra screw was "just for pretty".

When I read those old ads disguising themselves as manuals, they are full of unfounded hype. A skew back saw is stiffer, etc, etc. So we shouldn't put it past them.

To further complicate matters, the 18th c saws didn't seem to need more than 2 nuts, so it isn't like they were always there, and we're suggesting leaving them out. The third, fourth and fifth nuts were added by the saw factories. Here's another point. I can see adding a third screw for support, but what about the fifth? Do you really think there was a functional requirement for the fifth screw?

One more thing- I'm currently ripping with a saw that has no taper grind (like all of the saws in Wmsburg). Its heavy, but it works fine. I can see a case for taper grinding- sort of. But if i had my choice of two saws and the taper ground saw was considerably more money, I'd skip it.

Adam

Re: Large Tenon saw

mikew

>Wow. And wow again!

This thread has been a fascinating thread to me. It has taken on a life of its own and I appreciate everyone's comments.

Again, thank to all!

Take care, Mike

Re: Long haul

Warren in Lancaster, PA

>Many people have suggested that extra screws must have had a functional purpose, that they would not have been added for looks, etc. Do those people not notice those handsome curves and refinement on the handles. Does each of these curves have a functinal purpose? If you look at what is available in the hardware stores today, you can see that it is a lot easier to put in screws than make a charming handle.

Kenyon saw handle

Roger Nixon

>I have a 20" Kenyon back saw (tenon?) with a ugly user made handle. Is this "London Pattern" handle correct for this saw? I'd like to have one clcse to the original.

Re: Long haul

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>While a thickness taper may be useful in push saws, I suspect it's more difficult to implement. Of course, I have no scientific proof of this. On pull saws, its implementation would be a no brainer. Both types need all the help they can get in keeping the cut open on long rips and the like.

Pam

Re: Long haul

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>I should have said "all the help they can get keeping the saw moving on cuts like long rips."

Pam

Re: Kenyon saw handle

Todd Hughes

>Here is a photo from the book ..."Tools Working wood in 18th century America" which shows the saws of the Bejamine Seaton tool chest which were made in the 1700s by John Kenyon. There were other Kenyon saws such as Kenyon and Co that made saws much later all the way into the 1900's I would think if yours is an original 18th century Kenyon probably best not to do anything even if it has a replacement handle if the handle looks like it has any age to it.

Oh these saws are the ones that Adam talked about that are supposed to have tapered blades...maybe they are a little but sure ain't much, eh? Doesn't look to be enough to make any difference in thier use that it would have been done for any reason I wouldn't think....Todd

Re: tapered blades

Paul Benton

>Mike, it might be easier to describe the saw as non-parallel as Tyzack did with its brand "Nonpareil"

.....Paul

Re: tapered blades

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Nonpareil means having no equal. Ah, but you probably knew that and were joking.

Pam

Yes, it was a dumb question :-) or something else?

Mark Harrison -- in Sydney, Australia

>

Re: Kenyon saw handle

Roger Nixon

>Amazing, Todd. I don't know how old the saw is. I believe the stamp just says "Kenyon", I'll check it out tonight and post a picture. The handle wasn't usable. It was a very sloppy fit and just had machine screws and hex nuts.

Kenyon saw pix

Roger Nixon

>Here are some pix of my Kenyon saw

Re: Kenyon saw pix

Todd Hughes

>Looks like a pretty early saw but not an 18ths century one since it has the Cast steel mark. The Kenyon stamp looks the same as the Seaton saws but thiers were marked Spring and not cast steel. Aparently no known 1700s tools were ever marked "Cast Steel"...Maybe somebody could tell you for sure when it was made but I can't but just guessing maybe 1820-30s? again just a guess . I think older then that it would be marked German or spring steel. Still an interesting piece.Wonder how old the replacement handle was.... Would be curious to take the blade out to see about the taper , though saw has obviously seen some hard use......Todd