I picked a nice but kinda weird 8" (dovetail? - because of the angle of the handle to the teeth) close handled backsaw recently...weird because of its apparently divided parentage.
The medallian says it's a Simonds Saw MFG Co. saw, and has a patent date on it. The saw blade also has a Simonds etch on it. It is labeled a "NO. 9".
BUT....the steel back for the saw clearly reads "Henry Disston" cast steel.
I see no signs that the saw has been tampered with, altered or otherwise modified... but this was strange. What do I have here? A frankensaw? Or did Simonds buy their cast steel backs from Disston and use them in their manufacture?
Inquiring minds want to know? Can anyone out there help me? Thanks in advance.
>Sounds interesting Dave. The back branded differently from the blade and handle...I cannot add any info to the puzzle.
But I would like to ask the forum if there are any other saw reference sites beyond the Disstonian Institute for lumbermans type saws. I have a friend at work that recently found a Disston 60" harvesting(?) type saw. I would like to help him identify it. JR
>Is not factory...Someone took the back off of a Disston and put it on the Simonds. 8 inch is a pretty unusualy small backsaw and while I won't say for sure I wouldn't be surprsied if the blade wasn't cut back when the back was put on.Is the saws etch centered in the blade?...by the way Simonds didn't make a no.9 backsaw I don't think...if you look close probably says 96,97,98, ot 99....Todd
Thanks for your post. As usual, your posts get me thinking and making more careful observations.
On the centering of the etch, it looks quite centered to me - especially along the length of the blade; perhaps not quite along the width of the blade...but if not, it's not off by very much.
As for the number, you are right. I haven't cleaned up the blade much (it doesn't need alot) but there was a little pitting where the second digit behind the "9" and on more careful observation it looks like it might be a "7" - if so making this a "NO. 97."
Your comment on centering made me think to look at the Disston back - and then I noticed that it did not look centered. More careful observation of the back where it touches the wooden handle revealed a shiny area that looks as though it was cut and then smoothed with a file.
So, a frankensaw it is. Do you have a theory as to how something like this may come about? The handle has only two saw nuts and is angled the way you would expect a dovetail saw to be handled (that is the angle of the handle in comparison to the saws teeth). Also the saw nuts are from the same company as the the blade - so why might someone cut down the back on a Disston backsaw and add it to what otherwise appears to be a Simonds saw?
I don't think there are other sites...though I would love to be wrong. I've been searching in hopes that their might be some kind of a Simonds site...but no luck so far.
I hope I am wrong and someone can come up with what you need to help your friend.
Thanks for the link. I noticed that the NO. 97s on the website (and all the backsaws for that matter) had three screw nuts (1 medallion and 2 saw nuts) - whereas, mine has only two (1 medallion and 1 screw nut). I wonder what is up with that?
>Dave, I think that is just the size they show in the picture, smaller saws probably had two nuts. I have an 8" saw by Disston, Keen Kutter and Simonds and all have one saw nut and a medallion. The Disston and Keen Kutter are identical in every detail except medallion, etch and stamping on the spine.
That's helpful. I am still trying to sort out what part of this saw is original and which part is added or modified. The back is a no-brainer for being an add-on, but as of now I am inclined to think that is all. I see nothing on the ends of the blades to suggest it is anything but original - including the fact that the etch looks quite centered to me. If the nos. of saw nuts had also been "wrong" this would have sent me for a further loop.