Saw makers today

Re: Saw makers today

paul womack

>Lynx is a saw maker of today. Try googling it.

Sub-brand of Flinn-Garlick

http://www.flinn-garlick-saws.co.uk/acatalog/The_Lynx_Range.html

BugBear

Re: thanks

paul womack

>The article was originally going to be a simple list of makers with an indication of their product range and pricing where available. Might have to do more than this, judging by the very useful response.

If the past is anything to go by, you'll never manage to be sufficiently impartial, objective and accurate to satisfy everybody on this forum.

Write an article that satisfies you (or your groups) purposes, and take what advice you find helpful from here.

BugBear

that's exactly my point, Paul

VTAndy4

>A "semi-ordered" ("clustered" I called it) list is exactly right, but many of the posters above wanted _one_ maker to be put ahead of the list. That would no longer be a semi-ordered list. The very idea that "most comfortable" be considered a universal criteria for saws is absurd.

Add to this Mike's own disdain for "the best..." and it's clear that the list was fine as is, without the specific ordering that was being called for above.

-Andy

That's what I'm talkin' about!

VTAndy4

>Thanks for posting it here, Mike. I think that it will be good for some people to see a handsaw _in serious use_. I'm sure that she has ripped many times that by now. Very inspiring.

-Andy

speaking of all those Flinn-Garlick brands

VTAndy4

>Has anyone tried them out side-to-side?

It's hard to get an idea from the company's website about what the differences are. Are they all the same steel and tooth-work but different handles and labels?

Re: _your_ list isn't _mine_

Marv

>Andy

EVERYONE'S sawing needs are not different. While some needs are different, a large number of people who use handsaws will be doing the same thing and will need the same kind of saw to accomplish the same kind or similar task. This doesn't mean that everyone will use the right saw for the right job. So lets not use the word "everyone" when discussing a topic of such a general nature. There is no difference between one person sawing a 1 x 12 pine board and another person sawing a 1 x 8 pine board. Those two people have the same need if they are using a handsaw. Whether or not they use the proper saw for the need is another subject and doesn't pertain to Peter's list(s) of present day saw makers. We will each have our own list no matter how much discussion on the subject continues. My main point here is...Everyone does not have a different need. There are many common needs. If "everyone" had a different "need", there wouldn't be enough saws available to satisfy that many needs. Sorry, Peter, this particular post is not helpful I'm sure.

Marv

Re: speaking of all those Flinn-Garlick brands

Steve Hamlin

>I have only had straight handled gents/jewellers/beading type saws from the two ranges, but couldn't distinguish between the two lines except for the handle. This wasn't comparing exactly like with like from each line, though.

Things have been a little hectic for them recently in the aftermath of the floods this summer, but I have asked if they could offer some info on plate thickness, steel hardness, shaping and sharpening.

Cheers

Steve

Ah, I see. Agreed!

Paul Kierstead

>And I have a pretty strong dislike for the cult of "The Best"

Re: Medallion Toolworks

Jim Shaver - Oakville, Ontario

>Hi Norman,

I'd say that..

:-)

Take care,

Jim

I can see

VTAndy4

>... what you mean -- but it is missing my point and perhaps overstating what people have in common here. Even if two guys both saw a 1x12 their needs are different. Are they the same height? Do they have the same size sawhorses/sawbenches? Are their hands the same size? Do they both saw the same number of boards per year? Does one sharpen his own saws, and the other want to send them back to the manufacturer for sharpening... Does one saw roughly and plane to the line, while the other depends on a clean finish from the saw (Adam ahem ahem) etc. etc. If sawing needs were so universal, then why is customization cited so frequently above as the thing that separates Mike from the pack? I guess one can believe that "sawing is sawing," but then, perhaps a Festool circular saw is the best for that person? To return to the reason why I posted in this thread, Peter should keep his list as is rather than giving an ultimate and too specific rating.

And beyond that, care to saw why "if" you bought a saw, it would be from Mike? Have you tried one? What keeps you from buying it? There seems to be a lot of endorsement from people who haven't had much use with these saws. (I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the saws, but I am skeptical about the reason for glowing and superlative reviews from people who have not put a _lot_ of time using a product -- I bow to Warren's authority on this! (see his post below)

-Andy

Re: I can see

Steve Hamlin

>Hi Andy

Perhaps as one of the 'light users' cited, the tale of my first set of Mike's teeth will give insight into the added value.

As background, I'm the sort that likes to use the (functionally) best tool for each job, and woodworking (specifically building fretted stringed instruments) is a hobby pursuit. I still have a lot to learn, and so confidence in the suitability of a tool helps focus on my developing skillset.

I commonly need to make up to 4" deep 12 degree scarf cuts, and using commonly available backsaws, the cuts would either need a lot of cleanup (combination of my (in)ability and factory set) or wouldn't be deep enough, so I'd have to cut from both sides. Saw sharpening was a black art (well, OK, it still is, but at least I can recite the incantations now)

I'd heard similar oohs and wows about Mike's output, and so asked if he could help. He asked for full details about what I expected of the saw, the target woods, the type and size of cuts, even requesting pics as he wanted to reproduce exactly what I was doing before finalising plate thickness, blade length, ppi, rake and fleam.

Hand size was mentioned too.

As I was an ab initio with regards filing, Mike also suggested practice plates with the same tooth configuration, files and set.

The result was 9ppi, 16" long with 4 1/2" usable depth for the cost of an LN 14" and a cup of coffee and a slice of cake. A single plane pass over the resulting cut and it's done.

Given a plate of suitable dimensions and judicious use of files, set and stone, an experienced sawyer would no doubt be able to reproduce, or indeed get my results with a lesser saw, but initial set up is part of what your paying for with a quality saw.

I do have an Adria and an LN filling other roles. With these, one gets a well made saw with a good average set up. Mike provides invaluable consultancy and delivers a superb tool tailored to meet your unique requirement.

Mike doesn't charge enough.

Cheers

Steve

Warwickshire England branch of the Wenzloff & Sons Appreciation Society :D

great!

VTAndy4

>Steve,

Thanks for writing that up -- sounds great.

I do not doubt, and have never doubted, that Mike's saws are wonderful. I've only had one of his saws (a dovetail saw) in my hands for a few minutes, and it was certainly well made and did the job it was supposed to do. The idea of owning and using a saw that Mike made appeals to me as much as it does to anyone else who "knows" Mike from the various forums. If I had unlimited funds to stock my sawtill, I would probably get several 28" tapered saws and some longer backsaws -- stuff that I can't get from other makers, in other words. I'm assuming that they're great saws. But alas, the limitations of budget mean that I won't be able to place an order as an experiment, and made the Pax handsaws, and even some LN backsaws, the better option for me. As a novice, it also seems more reasonable.

What I've seen here on the boards is a number of people who endorse products that they have never used -- and even posts about owning a tool but no description (like you provided in detail) about the jobs they do with the tools. Your post was really cool, and I'd love to see a photo-documented version of it.

What I question is the absolute rating. There are many factors, and what you described clearly weights customization heavily. Obviously Mike is the only serious producer offering this degree of customization, which is great. For someone for whom the offerings by Adria or LN (tooth count, length, size and shape of handle etc.) will fit the jobs, I'm not sure what the customization adds. So some sort of "listing," which would indicate that Mike is the only maker offering custom options, rather than ranking, might be more appropriate.

I guess there are some people out there who want a whole set of matching saws for all purposes, and this wouldn't be possible from anyone except Mike and the Sheffield makers, because LN and Adria (and Gramercy) are not currently offering full sets. So between customization otherwise not offered and a full range of handsaw types, Mike is obviously in his own category in a directory of saw makers. It's just a matter of being clear about what the criteria are for the list. Would putting him in this category mean that his 15pt 9 inch backsaw is better for cutting dovetails than the same offering from the others? That is probably less clear-cut.

I wonder how many people out there have even given the new Gramercy dovetail saw a serious test trial. It's the only new saw of its kind available (in terms of its dimensions and hang), and I'd like to hear comments from someone more experienced than I am, because to my novice hands its cutting seemed to rank it above all others that I have tried.

-Andy

Re: Ed Paik i n Oakville

Steve Denvir

>"Plane Orgy on Sep. 8"?

Tell us more, please.

Re: Ed Paik i n Oakville

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>By the end of today, maybe tomorrow, I'll be able to make an announcment, some loose ends to tie up before that...

Meanwhile you can search for "plane orgy" in the archives, for an idea of what this is about...

DC

Re: speaking of all those Flinn-Garlick brands

Steve Hamlin

>I have had a reply from Thomas Flinn and Co which covers the differences between the two lines. Quoting from the response:

.................................................................

Pax 1776 Dovetail and Tenon Saws have the same handle

hang and plate thickness ( .020" )

The fundamental differences between the Pax and Lynx ranges are as follows:

1. Pax Dovetails, Tenons and Handsaws are ALL hand sharpened. Lynx saws are machine sharpened. Both are re-sharpenable.

2. Pax Dovetails and Tenons have a mirror finished brass back as do the Lynx with Walnut Dovetails and Tenons. The rest of the Lynx range have a machine polished back.

3. The steel used is the same on both ranges - CS80 (commonly known as saw steel).

4. Pax Dovetails, Tenons and Handsaws all have a Two Tone Beech Handle and a medallion and use solid brass screws. These are packed in a presentation style box. The smaller Pax saws have a rosewood handle. The Lynx range has the option of Beech Handles or Walnut on the Dovetail, Tenon and Handsaws (which too have the medallion and brass screws). The walnut range are also packed in a green presentation style box. The Beech handled range are packed

in a wallet. The smaller saws are made using a Beech handle.

5. Pax Handsaws are taper ground and breasted and the Lynx Handsaws have a straight tooth line. The walnut ones are taper ground.

6. Hardness is 45 rockwell.

.................................................................

HTH

Steve

Re: Ed Paik i n Oakville

Marv

>Hi Steve,

What specifically makes Ed's saws better? Is it the handle design? Is it the design of the teeth? Rake angle?, bevel angle?, set?, etc.? Does he graduate the teeth smaller at the toe end for an easier start?

I'm very curious because I custom sharpen backsaws and handsaws. Other than rake angles and bevel angles and set and thickness of the blade there isn't much else that can make one saw different from another.

Thanks,

Marv

Re: Ed Paik i n Oakville

Steve Hamlin

>Hi Marv

I'm either the wrong Steve or have the wrong saw (Mike's not Ed's :) ) but I agree. Beyond the first sharpenings the only functional differences that can remain are points per inch and handle hang and shape (all user modifiable) together with plate thickness, grinding and tension, size and weight.

My rip, hand, panel, table and compass saws are all oldies (a mix of mainly Tyzack, Disston and Livingston) and each is dedicated to a specific job. I can have no notion of the original tooth shape, so until I've better developed my filing skills and knowledge, all I can do is try to reproduce what was there when I found them.

It will (gulp) be the same when I eventually have to put file my 16" Wenzloff.

What will be left will be my (hopefully close) facsimile of the original setup, together with an exceedingly comfortable handle with a hang that seems to present the tool perfectly to the cut.

Mike gave a rule of thumb for hang a little while back on another thread. Think it was that the grip should be tangent to a circle centered on a point two thirds along the blade a third up from the edge, with the height of the handle (and so drive angle relative to the edge) dependent upon the nature of the cut.

So what makes them special is indeed handle design, fine plate gauge (on mine anyway) and very carefully considered pitch, rake, fleam and set (which should provide a template for future filings.) From anectodatal evidence and my (limited) experience, Mike and Sons do set lighter than is common on other freshly picked new saws.

On a side note, it would be interesting to know how the makers profile their archetypal off the shelf user. So for instance do Flinn & Co consider users more likely to be using fuzzy wet pine, and so apply a heavier set, or is it more about shop floor procedures and balancing rework/QC issues and output.

Cheers

Steve

Re: GREAT INFO - THANKS

paul womack

>

Re: Ed Paik i n Oakville

Marv

>Hi Steve,

Being the feeble minded old fool that I am, I was actually trying to ask Jim Shaver about the Ed Paik tenon saw.

But thank you for taking the time to respond.

As for the hang aspects of any saw, the old rule I've always gone by is the index finger should be pointing down the blade toward the center area of the toe or front end of the blade. With a tenon saw, alot of people will help guide the saw with the other hand, grasping the front top corner of the spine, especially the larger saws. This helps steady the start of the cut.

Often times the teeth are so bad on a saw I'm filing for someone, I have to grind off all the teeth and start with a blank edge. When I retooth a blade, on some saws I leave about 3/4" to 1" at the toe end with no teeth. This helps a great deal in starting the cut precisely on the line. For very small dovetails this is very handy. I recently did a DT saw like that for a guy who makes jewelry boxes.

I always set the teeth with just enough so the blade won't drag and so it can be steered just a bit. I will assume the user is going to be cutting dry wood. More set can easily be added but when there is too much set, it requires some filing to reduce it. I think that Mike uses the same guide lines regarding set. Production saws usually have too much set. Alot of people go by the numbers on a saw set. Those numbers will usually add too much set to the teeth.

Kinda off the subject here regarding Peter's list, but what the hey? Sharing and learning is what it's all about.

Thanks,

Marv

Re: Saw makers today

Peter Evans in Sydney

>Thanks to all those who contributed, my article is now in draft. After it goes in the October Newsletter, will hopefully be posted on the web site.

Cheers Peter,

feel free to continue the ideas and criticism.

Re: Ed Paik in Oakville (long)

Rick in Oakville

>I have a dovetail saw made by Ed Paik. I was lucky enough to attend a BBQ where Ed brought some of his saws and other people brought a Lie Nielsen dovetail saw, a Gramacy Tools gent's saw, a Adria dovetail saw, and a couple of much older tenon saws.

Everyone at the BBQ liked different details of different saws slightly more or less. All of us thought Ed was already making a dovetail saw in the same league as the Lie Nielsen and Adria. For me, I liked the handle shape on Ed's saw slightly more than on the Lie Nielsen or Adria but it wasn't a huge difference - they are all very good saws.

I bought a saw from Ed because he lives in the same town I do and is producing a very good, hand made product. I like him and I wanted to encourage him to continue to make saws.

More important to me is that he also let me choose the wood (European beech) for the handle. The light weight of the wood (compared to the tropical hardwoods often used on small saws like these) combined with the heavy brass back gave the saw a balance I personally like very much.

Most of the old tenon saws I've seen that could be used to cut dovetails have thicker saw plates than any of the new dovetail saws on sale. The only old saws I've seen (on e-bay and online sellers) that looked like they would be as thin as the new saws ended up selling for as much or more than the new saws, so I gave in and bought a new saw.

A lot of words about a small saw - whew!

So if you sort through that...

VTAndy4

>... then it looks like the Lynx line with the Walnut handles are pretty much the same as the Pax line, except that they haven't been hand sharpened. So someone who can sharpen a saw competently can save some $$$ by going with the Lynx saws and spending some time filing? Or did I miss something?

-Andy

Re: So if you sort through that...

MikeW

>Pretty much. Main issues from how I read that are the breasting and it is unclear to me if both are taper ground. As well, you are still left with soft steel. Not too big a deal if you sharpen more freqently.

Take care, Mike

Soft steel

Warren in Lancaster, PA

>I have three old Disston "panel" saws. The most recent I purchased in 1982. They have different handles, different taper grinds and different steels. I know which handle I like best and which taper I like best, but though they are quite different, it would be hard to say which steel I like best. There are trade-offs in ease of sharpening and setting (the teeth on the hardest can break with too much set) and perhaps longevity. I think there are differences in flex and springiness. I think it would be hard to establish an ideal steel for saws.

Re: Soft steel

MikeW

>I certainly do not wish to discount your preference or lack there of.

Historically, saw makers would have prefered to make the steel even harder than the low RC 50 range. What has been used historically--pre Disston sell off and for a long time before--is a trade off between sharpening, setting, longevity of the edge, etc. A saw in the mid to lower RC 40 range is too soft for day in, day out working. Unless, of course, one likes to touch up the teeth more frequently.

Spring steel used in saw making for the better saws is in the RC 48 to lower RC 50s. The thinner a plate is, the lower it is from any given steel mill for the most common spring steel used in saw making. Hence this type of steel's RC is expressed most commonly as RC 48-52. RC 48 represents the thinnest they make (say 12 thou) to RC 52 (from about 40 thou and above).

Setting teeth, even a fairly heavy set, will not break the teeth on decent steel. Whether soft or harder steel, teeth can break from sudden shock (hard knots), repeated setting (shouldn't need to set ever sharpening), setting to opposite sides from how it was last (metal fatigue), etc.

Old saws (pre-1900) can be either too brittle or soft in various spots. That has to do with the steel making more than anything else. though obviously how the saw was treated in its life also has an effect.

While it may be "hard to establish an ideal steel for saws," one should be aware that there are trade-offs at least in regards to sharpening. Then again, it ain't that hard to figure out there are better steels than others. Then again, what the heck do I know.

Take care, Mike