Glen-Drake saw

Re: Glen-Drake saw

Dean Lapinel

>Woops-

I missed all the hoopla about this saw in the thread below. I wouldn't have thought that anyone would have been so insulting about a product from Kevin. He doesn't have a history of making "gadgets". Though I can saw well (and do all the time) I like to see how new tools work and I like to collect from fine toolmakers.

I guess I should apologise for showing interest :)

Re: Glen-Drake saw

Bob Lang

>Dean,

The surface is "satiny" but is more reflective than the pictures on the blog show. In the first shot the wood can be seen reflected in the blade. This is close to my real life experience with it. It ain't a mirror, but you can see the reflection of the wood. The other shots look a bit duller because of the way I lit the photo. Kevin is giving away his DVD, and I'm sure he's willing to talk about it.

Bob Lang

Re: Glen-Drake saw

Dean Lapinel

>I should have mentioned it but better later than never.

I thought that was an excellent write up Bob.

Dean

Appreciation

Warren in Lancaster, Pa

>This saw discussion has given me a new appreciation for the work of Mike W., Adam C. and others on this forum. They spend free time retoothing saws, varying tooth angles, handle angles, set, gauge, length, various steels, etc., then trying the saws on different thickness and species. All to further our understanding and improve our saws. Compared to this work, a two handled saw is but a Trivial Pursuit.

Respectfully disagree

Bob Lang

>In addition to the handles, there are also some innovative features to the blade and to the tooth configuration. This isn't something that was cooked up over breakfast with a sample sent to market by dinner time. Kevin Drake will have to sell about a zillion saws to make up for the investment of his time in this.

Bob Lang

Re: Kevin thinks differently than I

Glenn Madsen near San Francisco

>It's clear that this saw is the result of thinking clearly differently about tools to work wood precisely. While I may not purchase one of these (there are already a dozen saws of varying capabilities in my shop being mostly ignored), this saw is very much the tool for someone who works to very specific goals.

Most of his tools struck me as having that quality.

Maybe in a year or so...

Not to worry, Dean

Bill Houghton, sunny Sebastopol, CA

>you can buy it and tell us how wrong we collectively are.

Re: Respectfully disagree

Paul Kierstead

>Simply because we don't necessarily see the advantages (or, in fact, consider it a disadvantage) in the two handedness (admitted only in theory, not having the opportunity to try it) does not mean we are dissing Kevin or disrespecting him. I see a troubling number of posts that imply that to not care for the design is, in someway, disrespectful of the inventor and wrong. There are a zillion new idea's every year and we all have to have some mechanism to sort them out without personally trying each and every one of them. It is not wrong to pass judgement after giving it some consideration; it is good sense. Clearly that judgement will be wrong sometimes; the more radical the idea, the more likely we are to make an error (but also more likely the device is not a great idea).

I find that kind of stance uncomfortable and inaccurate. I am willing to be wrong, but implying that everyone who thinks like this is close minded and dissing the inventor is disingenuous. Sure a few people said slightly harsh things about gizmo's and marketing (but still pretty calm I think), but I don't think the general painting of all "naysayers" with one brush is fair.

I should clarify that I am not picking on you here, Bob, and am not trying to put words in your mouth; I have to reply under someone's message and you have not committed much sin here, but you get to be the staked goat, I guess.

Re: Kevin thinks differently than I

Dean Lapinel

>Kevin (in my opinion) has only made practical tools. This tool makes sense but not just for a novice. The propioception of using two hands gives the user a high level of awareness of subtle misposition.

Even without that in mind, it's cool looking and collectable right off the gate.

That would be "proprioception"

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

Re: That would be "proprioception"

Dean Lapinel

>Of course I know that. Perhaps you did that for the sake of others but that's part of my field of practice...allow a little typo? :)

Re: That would be "proprioception"

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Sorry, should have explained, it was for all of us who had to look it up. Yep, that's "us." :)

Pam

Re: one-handed?

dave brown

>I'd be all for trying a one-handed version of the saw. I think the saw back looks very cool and the unique filing of the blade seems worth giving a try.