We have discussed this in various places, but the whole question of good WESTERN handsaws still begs for a thorough treatment. The wisdom I think I have gleaned is that some of the very best ever made were mid-nineteenth-century British. Of course, most people have never seen one and never will except in the possession of a collector where its useful life has effectively ended.
So, setting aside exotica like that, what should a bunch of allegedly practical guys like us look for, either new or used, that will give us genuinely high quality performance and service in each of the following categories (again, please, only those items that are reasonably likely to be available):
+ Standard rip and crosscut
+ Dovetail
+ Tennon
+ Offset (for flush cutting of through tennons etc.)
+ Mitre
AND., JUST AS IMPORTANTLY, WHAT SHOULD BE AVOIDED?
Replies
Never had much of a need for an "offset". Anytime I've used a saw for trimming a through tenon, or dowel plugs for that matter, I've scarred the surface when using any saw. I will say because of that, I really didn't use that practice very much and prefer to saw proud and use a sharp chisel to pare to the finish surface.
Joe,
Lee Valley makes a western crosscut (push) saw with japan style teeth, that if I am going to use a western saw for crosscut, its the one. They also make a very nice flush cutting saw (set on only one side) but it is a pull saw. My rip saw is push, but all the rest are pull.
Pedro
In your experience, does the Lee Valley track a line well? Is it easy to sharpen?
The saw is amazing, but may be hard to sharpen, it takes a special file. I would sugest a pull saw for everything. Its all I ever use now.
Pedro
The problem in the present era is not getting good handsaws, but getting them sharpened.
There is no longer a (reliable!) service at the local hardware store, and learning to sharpen your own (to a high standard) is a substantial effort.
And make no mistake, traditional saws ("softpoint saws", if you will) do need sharpening.
BugBear
I wrote an article for another magazine last year that I think answers some of your questions. I recommend it to you.
I think there are a couple tricks-
First, I think its important to develop good technique. In my opinion, that's a methodology that allows beginners to be successful almost immediately, as opposed to the technique some master uses. In my opinion, Rob Cosman illustrates a very poor technique with his dovetail saw. It works for him, but it won't for many (and that's why its poor). There is an easier way to use that saw.
Second, you have to marry the saw to the work or vice versa. That's what my article was about. Technically you could go through the article, look at the work you do or want to do, and arrive at a theorhetical group of saws. I think that's an effort well spent (thus the article).
What to look for are:
1) Long saws in good condition with tall toes that have very coarse teeth. Avoid the 6-8 point long cross cut saws. Those are carpenters tools and in my view, not that helpful.
2) A 20" panel saw
3) A 14" back saw (file this cross cut)
If you don't cut many dt's a $20 gent's saw from Crown will suffice. It will need some amount of rework though. I would avoid old Disston dovetails. Their blades are too thick and their handles aren't great.
What to avoid are:
Those long mitre saws. Mitre joints are really not a traditional joint so the need for such a saw is questionable. Beyond that, if you are wetted to making miters in sufficient quantity to warrant buying a special tool, I think most will be happier with an electric chop saw.
Tenon saws. A tenon saw needs to be at least 16" long and should be longer. They need coarse teeth for their long kerfs. The problem is that with one notable exception (below), the people who make saws, don't know how to use them or know what they are for. The 12" tenon saw is a perfect example. Beyond that, people who really know how to use saws ceased to be a market effecting force in 1840.
Japanese saws and frame saws. I think the age of the dominance of japanese saws is drawing to a close. In my view, they offer no advantages for the average woodworker beyond the fact (and this is a big fact) that they are made well and are ready for use "out of the box". Now that Mike Wenz is producing saws, pull saw users can finally see what a western saw can do.
Adam
Adam,
First, I think its important to develop good technique.
Could you describe what you feel are key points to good technique?
Rob Cosman teaches in town each summer here. I've seen a few of his demo's at teh wood shows, so I assume that I have been influenced by him. Can you outline what you feel are the problems iwth his technique? I'm not trying to start anything, just seeing if I can find improvements in my own sawing techniques.A tenon saw needs to be at least 16" long and should be longer.
Clearly I'm not a hand tool specialist... I've used LN carcass saws to cut small tenons with success. I assume that the length is needed for larger sized tennons to get a long enough stroke to clear sawdust and make the stroke worthwhile... (?)
I have to agree with your prediction about Japanese saws. I used the when I first started getting serious about woodworking as a hobby. They're fine, they cut well much better than the cheapo gents saw I had been using. I had the opinion that people just were not making good Western saws anymore. Then I was given a LN Carcass Rip saw as a gift... and I've never looked back. In my opinion a well sharpened and set western saw beats a Japanese saw hands down.
I have Rob's video. When sawing dovetails he appears to place the teeth of the saw flat on the end grain and carefully and lightly start the cut. What he actually seems to do is lift his wrist to knick the far corner first, then saw across the end grain. That's a tiny bit easier, but still not preferred in my shop.Starting any saw on end grain is difficult. Once started, sawing straight down is difficult. Correcting requires a touch of twist which is a losing strategy with any saw since twist only effects the near side (with a push saw). The kerf prevents a similar twist on the far side.As a result we hear guys talking about saw "tracking" (there's no such thing) and how or where to stand. The only real teachable lesson I hear is: practice (Frank Klauz- essentially: saw 10,000 more of these and you'll be able to saw like this too).I feel the "saw the corners out technique" is a superior technique and is also highly teachable. For that same dovetail cut the saw is held using a pistol grip which results in a toe up orientation of the saw and the near corner is sawn out. The cut begins with a light
push at the corner. The trick is to advance on both lines at once. Doing so maintains the squareness of the cut. If at any time, one of the lines is lost, the sawyer holds one line, and advances on the other- typically making the correct with a lower angle (laying the saw into the kerf- long makes straight)This technique has many advantages:
-It utilizes and explains the unique shape of the dt saw handle
-It can be used successfully for all saw cuts
-It permits the use of agressively raked saws- Agressively raked saws do not perform well on end grain. Its notable that LN's dt saws are not aggressively raked.My recommendation is to practice this technique on simple cross cuts. Begin by marking all around. Proceed by sawing each corner out. Continue each cut until the two adjacent faces are knicked by the kerf. Then lay your saw into that knick and saw the next corner out. You can use this same technique for ripping. Especially helpful for thick
stock, the board is periodically flipped.Just generally though, the principle is one that Roy Underhill showed us years and years ago. To straighten a rip cut, you lay the saw down into the cut. Twisting the saw simply doesn't work well.Adam
P.S. Its my intention to demonstrate this technique and discuss 18th c saws and sawing. If you have a woodworking club somehwhere near New Jersey and would like to me to speak, feel free to ping me offline.
Adam:To ask a prior question that may have been lost, what is a tall toe, relatively speaking? Also, I am not sure I follow on the coarse teeth. Are you suggesting fewer teeth is better (ala rip saws but set for crosscut, of course)?Also, what do you mean by nicking the two adjacent faces? Do you mean that you start sawing through the corner, following the "down" and the "across" lines until the kerf has reached across the full width and begun to cut on the other "down" side, and then to flip the piece and use that original cut as a guide?What do you mean by laying your saw in, and how does that help correct rips?I realize that these are painfully basic questions. They remind me of what we had to ask when we children of the shake-em-up rock and roll age began to learn to dance. Do what? How? Pretty hard to say in writing without illustrations, too. However, I do appreciate your patience and time.
A saw with a 3" toe (far end) say, is close to its full original height. That means the saw hasn't lost an inch or more due to filing. Old saws aren't necessarily consistent in properties throughout the blade. At teh very least, like my new saws, old saws were probably work hardened near the teeth. But there are many other reasons why its preferable to have a saw that hasn't lost too much of its original size and shape.Coarse=fewer teeth per inch. Rip v. cross cut is independant of this.Imagine a rip cut gone bad. Somewhere the cut was okay. So you leave the toe in the good part and bring the heel back to the good beyond (possibly far beyond) the miscut area. You can't do this by keeping the angle of the saw the same as it was. So you lower the angle (from 45 degrees say) to 20 degrees. In effect you jump over the miscut area and fix it. Of course this is the extreme. In most cases a slight correction made soon enough will keep you on the straight and narrow. Its not that hard really. It is significantly easier with the right saw though. This is hard to explain. Maybe that's why we don't read about it more often.Adam
Makes much more sense on all counts. Thanks for taking the time to explain it more fully.You know, it is interesting that so little is said about saws and saw technique, especially when people will put so much effort into discussing some VERY fine points (so to speak) of planes and chisels. Really, if something is going to be made with hand tools, the saw is the most basic of all, all the way from the forest right up nearly to the final finish. Not everyone will care much about hand saws, but I would think they would be quite signiicant to the hand tool crowd, yet they seem to be ignored.In truth, hand saws are more pleasant to use if you have the time and skills. I recall hours in the shop as a boy hearing saws snore, if you will, with no ear protection or other precautions except for the occasional warning to stay out of the way. We had power saws, too, but didn't use them as much.My own saw skills are OK for general carpentry, but are not up to cabinet standards.
My 10 year old has been in the shop for about 5 years in some capacity or another. I rarely cut anything for him and he doesn't go near the power tools. He has an old H Diston saw which I had sharpened for him. He can cut pretty close to a line in walnut and cherry. I am not saying he's perfect, but its fairly close.
I can't help but think that some of the "deficiencies" in western saws just isn't a lack of practice .
Frank
"As a result we hear guys talking about saw "tracking" (there's no such thing) and how or where to stand."
I'm interested in why you believe there is no such thing as "tracking". Cosman's argument seems to be that a well-sharpened and set saw will need little if any correction in the cut. And it seems pretty clear to me that how a saw is sharpened and set has a great deal to do with how well it cuts. As you know, a saw that has more set on one side will tend to drift to that side -- i.e. not track. A saw with equal set will not drift and will tend to continue in the direction it was started -- i.e. track. As I understand him, Cosman focuses on getting the saw started square and plum and generally lets the well-sharpened and set saw continue in that direction. As I understand your argument, it is hard to get a saw started square and plum in end grain, but doesn't mean there is no such thing as tracking.
As for Cosman's technique in general, I think his results speak for themselves. If starting a saw in endgrain were truly a risky proposition, prone to inaccuracies then what pact with the devil did he make to produce such impressive dovetails straight from the saw? Perhaps when you were learning to cut dovetails you did not have a well-sharpened and set saw?
The thing I don't like about "tracking" is it sounds like another form of jig mentaility. The saw doesn't decide if you saw straight or not. You do.
You're right that if a saw is mis-set, it will be difficult to use. But between reasonably well set saws, there is no "tracking". All will cut straight if you use the technique I described.
And don't let yourself be snookered. Its not Cosman's results that matter. Its YOUR results with his technique. If you like his technique and find it works for you, stick with it. My guess is that is what Rob would say.
Adam
The thing I don't like about "tracking" is it sounds like another form of jig mentaility. The saw doesn't decide if you saw straight or not. You do.
Yes, and cars don't steer themselves either, the driver steers them. But we all know that some have "loose" steering and some "tight" etc. which can make for quite a different driving experience and demand different sets of skills from the driver to keep the car on the road. Similar things are true of saws in my experience: a sharp and well made saw starts easier and stays true to the line easier, all sawer's form issues being held equal. Also, a cut well begun is a cut more than half done, so to speak in that the start often does "jig" the rest fo the cut by holding and directing the saw.
Edited 2/28/2007 12:28 pm ET by Samson
Also, a cut well begun is a cut more than half done, so to speak in that the start often does "jig" the rest of the cut by holding and directing the saw.
So what do you do if you screw up that first stroke? Are you sunk?
Adam
So what do you do if you screw up that first stroke? Are you sunk?
The very first stroke is not what I was referring to so much as the first several that establish an initial kerf. If that kerf is off in some respect, you can certainly recover in various ways, though how successfully depends upon just how it has gone wrong (as in to the waste side or into the work piece, for example).
And as usual, this is all nearly impossible to talk about in the abstract. What are you cutting exactly? To what tolerance? Do you plan to plane and otherwise clean up the cut at the final fitting stage? etc. If it's dovetails or a tennon and you hope to have a snug fit right from the saw (as opposed to sawing just wide and paring for example), and your kerf is straying from the line by stroke 12 or so, sure you can take steps to recover, but it's unlikely to be a press-fit-from-the-saw, pretty joint any longer.
But, what's your point? My statement about the "jigging effect" of a good start is hardly controversial I'd think.
Like many things in woodworking, there is a long continuum between decent workable results obtained through intermediate level skills and master cabinetmaker results obtained through a lifetime of devotion and practice (muscle memory etc.). Getting to the former is not rocket science; it's no black art. Getting to the latter is largely unattainable for the more casual woodworker (though some very coordinated and talented types may very well get there). We sometimes talk as though the latter is necessary. Sort of "sawaholics annonymous" to paraphrase an author I recently read. In short, most sawing operations are just not that difficult as long as your expectations are reasonable. If I'm building a dovetailed chest, for example, I really don't expect myself to saw those scores of dovetails to a press-fit, gap-free state right off the saw. And I don't have to; the extra time spent paring to a perfect fit is not hurting my bottom line as I'm a hobbiest. A lot less pressure and lot less wasted wood with some slack in the system. I'm just as proud of the result, though perhaps you think I am less a man for paring?
samson was sayin...The thing I don't like about "tracking" is it sounds like another form of jig mentaility. The saw doesn't decide if you saw straight or not. You do. I guess I got jig mentality then, cause iffen ye re-sawing thick material on the bandsaw, maybe it's just me but even when the blade follows the line on the surface, but then follows a slightly circular patttern through the material, even my pea-brain ain't figured out how I can control a cut I cannot see- cause it's buried within two or three inches of wood.And curiously enuf, it likes to bend/deflect in towards the curvature of the grain of the material. If Samson has a way to predict this deflection, I'd love to know it.EricEric
That was my quote, not Samson's.
The issue you are touching on is my experience with sawing. You're right, you can't control a cut you can't see which is exactly why I don't like the way western woodworkers use japanese saws. You can only control, what I call "the cut"; the point at which the teeth enter the wood on the power stroke. Japanese craftsmen, as I understand their technique, don't work from the back side of the wood. They have a hands under, eye's over technique. So they are watching the cut as well.
But the point is, if you are ripping a board on horses and you are holding the line you see but find you have lost teh line on the far side, you can't correct from the side you are on. You can only flip the board over to fix it. And in my experience, one flip won't do it, you need to go back and forth a couple times to get that cut square (or on both lines).
What I do a lot of times is leave the line full, then plane down to it. That way, I needn't worry too much about accuracy. But this only makes sense for thinner woods. For thick woods, even a few degrees would be too much.
The moral of the story is that for me, line holding is an active process. Muscle memory may help, but its a simple technique that permits me to execute the sorts of feats I do- line splitting for example. That technique, (which I described earlier, I'm not being coy) doesn't require a special saw, or a special way to stand, or 20 years of practice. I took a picture of my efforts recently which showed that I had virtually irradicated a chalk line in 3" thick stock with an .042" thick homemade saw. I doubt a bandsaw could have done as well. The beauty of this boast is that all of you can take my advice, get a good saw, and do the exact same thing.
I think Pye was right. I think one reason people are interested in working with hand tools is precisely because success is NOT guaranteed. Success is based on your skill, and wit, and choices. And when you are successful, even with the smallest of endeavors, one can't help but feel victorious.
Adam
Adam:
WHile there are other aesthetic and emotional reasons to use hand tools, I think your point about the uncertainty and skill are spot on. In that respect, it is a little like fly fishing. There are far faster and more efficient ways to fill the freezer with fish, but none more interesting.
Thanks again, by the way, for your kind answers to my posts.
"And don't let yourself be snookered. Its not Cosman's results that matter. Its YOUR results with his technique. If you like his technique and find it works for you, stick with it. My guess is that is what Rob would say."
I certainly don't feel that I've been snookered by Cosman's videos. Quite the opposite. I was originally taught to saw the corners, as you suggest. But that technique never felt right to me. For one dovetail cut, for instance, I was really making three cuts: one corner, the other corner, and then what was left in the middle. Perhaps it was me, but I found that errors and mistakes krept in with increased frequency because to make a single cut had multiple steps and adjustments. My joints were not as tight or clean as I wanted.
After trying Cosman's approach I saw an immediate improvement. (I'm sure Cosman didn't invent this, I'm just using his name because that's where I learned it). I found that by using my fingers/knuckles as a fence for the saw blade and starting with soft light strokes, I could get my saw started splitting the line and then just let the saw do its work. I noticed a tremendous increase in the quality of my joints (and confidence to hand cut joinery). The key, however, is a properly sharpened and set saw. If your saw drifts because of poor set, this approach will lead to frustration and ill fitting joints.
The great thing about woodworking is that there are so many different ways of accomplishing essentially the same thing. You saw the corners. I prefer to saw stright down. You're presumably happy with your joinery, as am I. I just want to make it clear to folks that sawing the corners is one technique, but not the technique. Find a technique that suits you and stick with it.
Disclaimer: I sound like a Cosman salesman, but I have no affiliation with him whatsoever other than as an appreciative student of his dvds.
Adam - can I ask for some clarification here...is "sawing the corners out" the same sort of idea that is behind the strategy I learned for sawing tenon cheeks? If I'm picturing this correctly, your strategy for DTs (endgrain starts) is to begin with the saw at a 45 deg. angle upward (with the endgrain horizontal), then saw on this diagonal until you simultaneously hit the front baseline and the top far corner. Am I correct so far?Next: From here, do you then proceed as with a tenon, shifting to 45 deg down and ending with a horizontal cut through the triangular material separating the two kerfs (as with tenons), or do you gradually lower the angle until you end up at 90 deg as you hit the rear baseline?Sorry if this is confusing...Cosman is, to date, the only real point of reference I have seen 'in action'.R
Edited 2/28/2007 4:26 pm ET by raney
First things... I've only seen his plane video, so all my coments are based on his 30 minute had cut dovetail and mortise and tennon sales pitch... I mean demo's at woodshows. I admit I've learned a lot from him in those few minutes... and he's even convinced my wife to by me a Lie Nielsen saw...
What he actually seems to do is lift his wrist to knick the far corner first...
I've seen Rob at the woodshows, and I'm fairly certain this is what he does... Nicks the front edge then cuts flattens out on the end grain and down the line. He demonstrated mortise and tennon this way. I believe the idea is that you only have to look at one line at a time then, which in theory should be easier for a beginner.
It seems to me that Rob's method really depends on a sharp well set saw, and of course hitting the line at the start. The idea of "tracking" seems to come up often, and stems from the idea that a well tuned saw will cut straight (will it?). The question comes up what if you start a little off line...
It took me a couple of read throughs but I can see how your method will work. Thanks for the details, I'll be sure to give it a try.
If you have a woodworking club somehwhere near New Jersey...
Unfortunately I'm a little far north and on the other side of the continent... The rumor is we only get Rob out here because his wife has family here.
Adam said, "Mitre joints are really not a traditional joint..."
Hmmm, around 1700 your old pal Joseph Moxon describes the plane for shooting miters. Descriptions of tools for making miter joints pretty consistently show up in old texts and catalogs from then on.
And then he fantasized, "Beyond that, people who really know how to use saws ceased to be a market effecting force in 1840."
Where did that gem of information come from? I know I'm old but I wasn't around in 1840. In the 1950's there were two full-time saw sharpeners working about two blocks from my home and within a block of each other, one at the hardware store and one at the lumber yard. I watched Denver's suburbs grow up around me and temporary power to construction sites was uncommon there. Those houses were built with hand saws. In fact, the power miter saw you suggest didn't even exist until 1964. Before that, all trim carpentry was done with hand saws.
In the 1950's there were two full-time saw sharpeners working about two blocks from my home and within a block of each other, one at the hardware store and one at the lumber yard.
People who really know how to saw, know how to sharpen their own saws. You don't send out your plane irons to be sharpened, do you? The prevalence of saw sharpening services is an indication of the lack of skill of sawyers. But its not the only one.
Like planes, specialty saws began to disappear in the early 19th century. The essential 18" tenon saw was one of the first victims.
The new saws were not replacements, nor did the market choose the better tool. Ditto, I don't think Stanley ever made a high angle smoother.
Additionally, Disston dumbed down the long saw and cheapened it. He (and others) changed the "hang angle" and position of the handle to permit the use of a dull saw (to whom do you think he was targeting this product? Better sawyers?). This design change also allowed him to make the plate more triangular (less metal). Down force was produced by the user instead of the rectangular blade shape (compare a Wenz long saw to a Disston D8 thumbhole in blade shape and handle angle).
Backsaw blades were thickened. I'm not sure why. It may have been damage tolerance. All I can say is the backsaws in the Seaton chest are all thinner than their 19th c counterparts. Much more like japanese saws. DT saws were .015"! I don't think Disston ever made an .015" thick saw. I can also say having made many saws that straightening a thin blade is more difficult than straightening a thick blade. (Small corrections make S shapes).
Maybe you cleverly suckered me into plugging your tools, but woodworking and wood working tool-wise; A change for the worse happened in the early to mid 19th c as markets changed from servicing those who service the aristocracy, to a race to the bottom. Disston and Stanley were the Sam Waltons (Walmart) of their day. Better tools were available before them. Your planes are clearly evidence of this.
In all sincerity, my advice to get your hands on a set of Wenz' saws before he realizes he's not making any money and quits the business. These are identifiably and noticeably better tools than those previously available to us.
Adam
Where do you find Wenz saws?
Joe,
Here's the link:
http://www.wenzloffandsons.com/saws/index.html
.<!----><!----><!---->
Tschüß!<!----><!---->
<!----><!---->James<!----><!---->
<!----> <!---->
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that...."
--A.C. Clarke
Or how about here;
http://www.thebestthings.com/newtools/wenzloff_saws.htmI'm not in business with Mike. I've never met or spoken to the man. But my advice is not to kid around. These tool makers don't stick around for ever. Guys make tools for a limited time (Pete Taran, Leon Robbins, Sheppard etc) then they go out of business. In all of these cases, the tools have held their value or appreciated. If you are even remotely interested in learning to use saws, I'd place an order. Saws like these have not been commercially available for 200 years.Sorry if you think this is a hard sell, but that's the way I feel about it. These are great saws. Adam
Adam:Do you especially recommend the Seaton Chest reproduction saws, or as all of his saws of equal quality?
Adam,
No thought of you doing a hard sell.
I agree with you 100%. Only delay is that I'm still deciding what I need (as opposed to what I want...) and in what order to get them.
.<!----><!----><!---->
Tschüß!<!----><!---->
<!----><!---->James<!----><!---->
<!----> <!---->
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that...."
-- A.C. Clarke
Adam
I have enjoyed your articles in PW, and also your participation here at the Knots. Most of the time, you are very good at stirring the thinking process regarding hand tools and their application to woodworking, and that has been an extremely positive influence here on the Knots. However, I must respectfully disagree with your assessment regarding saw sharpening. I can't sharpen a saw worth a lick. I've never even tried. For me, there is no learning curve, because doing it once or twice a year or so, I'll never become proficient at it. There won't be a learning curve, because I'll forget everything I learned the last time by the the next time it's necessary. I'd suspect that by the time I actually got it right on either my rip or crosscut saws (I have the LN pair), I'd have to start over to do the first half as good as the second half. Then, the second half would need to be redone to be as good as the first redone half, and so on......
So, I suck at sharpening saws. I must, because I've never done it. But, I can sure as hell tell you that I can cut dovetails with the best of them. Nice, purty, teeny tight ones, too. That's something I do all the time, and I've gotten good at it. So, I see no correlation with the fact that good hand sawyers HAVE to automatically be good at sharpening saws. Maybe in 1780, but not necessarily today.
Running a successful business (2, actually) is also something I know something about. Been doing that for 21 years now this up coming summer. There comes a point in time where you have to choose the tasks that are profitable for you to do yourself, and outsource the rest. I can't possibly afford to blow several hours (I'm guessing, cause I really don't know) trying to learn how to make a saw vise, buy the files, learn to use the files, and sharpen the saws for the 20 or 30 or 40 bucks it'll cost to have a pro like Mike Wenzloff (if he even does it) or Cooke's Sharpening, a service almost everybody knows about, etc.. etc... oh yeah! Don't you need a saw set, too?? See what I mean.
While all that is happening at someone else's professional saw shop for less than what I make in a half an hour, I could have several carcasses pasted together, or several chair legs planed smooth and ready.
I don't think that we each need to be a Jack of all trades, so to speak. You know the saying. Jack of all trades, master of none. In todays business world, it can be considered a smart move to outsource some of the mundane jobs that aren't very costly.
Nice chatting with you again.
Jeff
Edited 3/3/2007 12:45 am ET by JeffHeath
Edited 3/3/2007 12:48 am ET by JeffHeath
Edited 3/3/2007 12:50 am ET by JeffHeath
Jeff,Sharpening a saw is akin to sharpening a chisel. Its not hard and takes about the same amount of time. If you want top performance from a tool, any tool, you must sharpen it yourself. If i can do it, you can do it. I've been using hand saws as my sole means of cutting wood, ply wood, mdf! for 10 years and I've never sent a saw out for sharpening.I remember hearing Alan Breed say that any tool that can be made, can be made better by sharpening it. He sharpened his coping saw blades! (he copes out his waste when dovetailing).I don't understand the double standard treatment of saws. Why are folks willing to spend any amount of money sharpening a chisel or plane iron and absolutely nothing on a saw? You wouldn't think for a minute to continue using a dull plane, then why a dull saw? These new kenyon copies are the infills of saws. I'm one of only a handful of craftsmen in the country working with kenyon style saws. I'm telling you guys these saws are special. They are UNLIKE the dumbed down D8 skewbacks. Parse it however you wish, but please try them for yourself before you decide whether I am right or wrong.Adam
Edited 3/3/2007 12:13 pm ET by AdamCherubini
Adam
I can't disagree with your point of view at all. You use handsaws way more than I do. I use them for joinery, and that is it. Without a doubt, I will have my hands on at least one, and maybe two Mikie saws. I've got a large commission check that will be coming in April for a rather large cabinet job I'm doing right now. The problem is, what to do with my LN's when I do. I love those two saws. They revolutionized hand work for ME in MY shop. I just wonder if the thing to do wouldn't be to just send him these, and have him dial them in, so to speak.
Jeff
Adam,
Sharpening a saw 1 a day gets you nowhere near the practice as sharpening a saw 50 times a day. A professional saw sharpener working by hand can easily do a better job than a part time sharpener. joel
Edited 3/3/2007 1:13 pm ET by testtest
"I don't understand the double standard treatment of saws. Why are folks willing to spend any amount of money sharpening a chisel or plane iron and absolutely nothing on a saw? You wouldn't think for a minute to continue using a dull plane, then why a dull saw?"
I would like to chime in here , if I may. I don't think there is much to understand other than the fact that it takes a relatively short time to sharpen a plane blade(about 5 minutes at most), and it takes much longer to sharpen a saw blade, and there may be some setting to do as well.
A saw blade remains serviceably sharp for far longer than a plane blade i.e plane blades need sharpening often compared to saws.
Saw sharpening requires some knowledge , skill and practice-compared to simple blade sharpening- this can be discouraging to some.
Saw sharpening is not really fun and worse, there are no exotic tools involved , not to mention strange rituals and beliefs....
I know how to sharpen saws and used to sharpen my own as a matter of pride but now I will happily pay a fellow who makes a living from it- that way there should be two people satisfied.Philip Marcou
Attention All:
Post #49 has been deleted from this thread. This has been a thoroughly educational discussion about the role of the woodworker as tool sharpener, but that post crossed the line into personal attack.
We fully encourage open debate about woodworking subjects, but we don't condone members who use the forum for personal jabs.
Thanks for your cooperation,
Matt BergerFine Woodworking
Adam said
"People who really know how to saw, know how to sharpen their own saws. You don't send out your plane irons to be sharpened, do you? The prevalence of saw sharpening services is an indication of the lack of skill of sawyers."I don't know about the US but in London woodworkers did not as a rule sharpen their own saws or grind their own tools as far back as the 1840's - My documention only goes that far back and I would guess in fact the practice goes back much further. There were two reasons for this: in the case of saw sharpening - No TIME - everyone was on piecework and it was just less expensive and better to have someone else do it. THe amount of specialization in craft was important to earn peicework rates and a person doing sharpening all day could do it a lot faster than a craftsman just doing it once a day. In the case of grinding - it was faster and cheaper to let someone else do it also - especially when you consider a hardware store would have a large grinding wheel and could do it quickly and a woodworker, espcially those working on-site didn't have ready access to anything other than a much less powerfull hand/foot grinder. Disston and thier compeditors didn't dumb down the handsaw - they highly tuned them for what they were mostly used for - house building. If I were making timerframe houses or door joints (pre-1840 which is also pre-disston) a big heavy saw would be pretty handy but if I am framing a house - I would much rather have a nice light saw that is easy to hold and cut in any angle. In the US and in England some of the greatest wooden housebuilding was done in the post civil war period. Really amazing work, at it's best jaw dropping in it's competexity. The men who did the work knew what they wanted in tools and the market responded. To say none of them knew a good tool makes no sense. This went on to WW1 and carried over to a large part through 1945 when the baby boom and the huge need for private houses, and the introduction of portable power tools finally ended the long tradition.
At the same time, beginning in the 1840's furniture construction was dumbed down as factory based power tools tool over. joel
I wouldn't know about Disston's saw designs, but enjoyed your comments about the cabinet makers and sharpener's specialization. You have done a better job thqn I of making the point I raised a couple of posts ago.In fact, for those of you with an interest in the dismal science, there has been a great deal of study on the micro (individial people and businesses) and macro (nations and regions) basis that has shown that everybody is more prosperous with specialization and division of production. On the other hand, I would agree with Adam that real cabinet makers and carpenters doubtless knew how to sharpen saws. The question is, would it have best served their interests to do so?
I am just questioning Adams premise that the exisitance of professional saw sharpeners is an indication of a decline in the skill of carpenter's and cabinetmakers. Which it isn't.
You and I agree.
I very much appreciate Adam taking the time to explain what he has explained in such detail, but on the matter of saw sharpeners and the decline in skills, I disagree. There is no obvious causal connection. You made that point very well. It was a matter of division of labor, rather than decline of skills.
Joe and Testtest,
I don't know this for sure, but I can easily see apprentices in the wood working trade doing a lot of sharpening and filing. It only seems reasonable to me that thy would be taught these skills as part of the trade, and because they were so cheap to keep, their time meant much less than the skilled workman, and if they were inefficient at first, it mattred less. Most of the skilled workman started as apprentices, and if they had the skill of sharpening, they learned it there.IMHO
Pedro
Sorry - But no.
THere is no evidence or documentation that apprentices were regularly responsible for sharpening saws. In smaller towns of course there would have been fewer professional saw sharpeners but in general saw sharpening according to the documentation I have was a subsistence job done by craftsman who could not get other work. And considering that saws needed to be sharpeded about every day it's no great surprise that it was well worth having someone else do it. One could assume that your average carpenter could do it if pressed but certainly not at the speed or effiecency or the low cost that a pro could. Records from the period give regular costs of wear and tear on equipment and that includes paying for sharpening and grinding.
THere is an exception - I think Sawyers sharpened their own tools but even there I'm not positive.
I'm not sure what records you're talking about or even what time period, let alone what trade. Traditional preindustrial carpentry is about as similar to cabinetmaking as bricklaying is. The people are different, the work is different so we should be more precise in what and where and who. Here's what I know. I've been trying to translate bits and pieces of Roubo using babelfish (it stinks!) Pretty sure Roubo talked about guys changing the rake angles of their saws for different work. I think the operative words was "croc", as in, to give the saw "croc". I tranlsated that as fang, or tooth, or bite. Regardless, we have a 1760 source about joinery, discussing saw filing- there are certainly images of saw filing in Roubo. So i think Pedro is right at least for this period, place and trade. Some joiners in 18th c France filed their own saws.Many or all early 18th c inventories include grindstones in cabinetmaker's shops. Its not a given that all American or even English towns had cutleries where bigger, better grindstones were present. I agree that early sandstone wheels were slow cutting, but more work needs to be done. I may not have cleaned my wheel sufficiently or used sufficient pressure in my tests. If I had a really bad edge and I could get that done elsewhere for cheap, I'd be inclined. But I can live without a 1/2" chisel for a day or two. I have 7/16" and 9/16" and a 1/2" mortiser if need be, plus paring chisels. Chisels were cheap compared to saws then. According to Smith's key, craftsmen paid 8 times the price of a 1" firmer for a 28" rip saw. That same saw was also 3 times more expensive than a smoothing plane. Inventories like that of Philadelphia cabinetmaker Charles Plumley indicate that craftsmen had many chisels but few saws (no doubt due to their cost). Because craftsmen were as busy as you say, one wonders how they could do without mission critical tools like saws for any length of time.Speaking of Plumley, the Plumley inventory (1708) includes these entries:
"8 hand saw files"
"4 small hand saw files"Experimental Archeology:
I do the sorts of work Plumley did, with the materials Plumley used, same species, same region, and I do it by hand. My saws aren't as hard as Disston's (at least according to Disston). My saws don't need to be sharpened daily or even weekly. Touch-up filing takes less than 10 minutes. I can file a saw in a woodworking vise. I've filed saws in 5 minutes. I can cut brand new teeth (in a clean plate) in about an hour's time. Sharpening a saw is no big deal. It about the same effort as sharpening a chisel or plane iron.About apprentices:
There was nothing free about apprentice labor. You teach this person to become fully functional as quickly as possible. Thereafter, you have a fully functioning cabinetmaker working and everything he builds, you pocket the labor. So you spend a year training this person, then get 6 years of labor from him. That's how it worked. Only a stupid master (or one without work- and that happened) would give his apprentice busy work or menial tasks. Adam
Adam:
"I'm not sure what records you're talking about or even what time period, let alone what trade. Traditional preindustrial carpentry is about as similar to cabinetmaking as bricklaying is. The people are different, the work is different so we should be more precise in what and where and who."Fair point.
My source is Henry Mayhew. Letters in the Morning Chronicle #s 57-69 (the various woodworking trades) june 20, 1850 - Sept 12, 1850
my earlier dates are based on reminiseces of the various woodworkers interviewed. But your point that the poepl are different is also true.
1794 (from the London Cabinet Society Book of Prices)A circular Card table. 3 feet long, one fly foot, square edge to the tops (simplest version), plain Marboro legs (I'm not sure what a marboro leg is but it's probably pretty simple.) 10/6 So basically 2- 3 days work (london rates). Start to finish, from correctly sized rough wood, not including oiling and polishing. And that was a high end price. The garrett masters would work for much less and a lot faster. I simply take issue with your original theory -that professional saw sharpeners indicated a decline in workworking skill. There is absolutely no documentation anywhere to back that up and I am certainly not arguing that cabinetmakers didn't know how to sharpen.
Joel I adore you and won't quarrel. You get the last word on this one. I just want to know what you will say when you hear (and I've actually heard this) that folks throw away their chisels when they get dull because it just doesn't pay to sharpen them. (the labor rate is $75/hour and the chisel costs $10) When that day comes, and it will, will we rally around these "fine" craftsmen?Adam
Adam, While I disagree with you a lot I think you have a lot to offer and I much enjoyed our romp at the metropolitan for the Townsend exhibit - I'm just amazed we didn't get thrown out for the noise we made. But anyway if you think my evidence is wrong let me know. I think you have an emotional attachment to the excitment we all felt when we finally got a sharp saw - and one we sharpened ourselves. And this is causing you to ignore actual data, actual contemporary accounts. Collier - the owner of the well known hardware store in London during the last bit of the 19th century said in a memoir originally written I think in the 1920's that Saturday afternoon was their busiest time because that's when the trademen were off (Saturday was a half day) and they would bring in their saws for sharpening and their chisels for grinding. Were all their customers talentless boors - I think not. joel
Edited 3/5/2007 10:49 am ET by testtest
Adam:
As it seems that my question, innocently intended, set up the ring for this round, let me observe that no one has yet scored a knockout. Whether housebuilders, or the fine craftsmen in your own 20th century family, it has not been shown that craft skills declined after 1840, of that there is any relationship between skill levels and the use of sharpening services.
That said, I will try to learn to sharpen saws -- simply because convenient services no longer exist. I know how to sharpen my chainsaw blades, and don't do it besause I don't want to and someone else will do it cheaply -- and I use my chainsaws pretty heavily in the cool season.
Someone asked about sawyers. I know some today who sharpen their own. They are small shops with limited production. I have been in the really big automated mills, too, but never thought to ask who did the sharpening.
On the other hand, back in the day, lumberjacks did not sharpen their own saws. The logging companies wanted those guys in the woods cutting trees during daylight. So, lumber camps had sharpeners who would file and set at night by lantern light. When the jacks were ready to head for the woods, their saws were ready and waiting.
THere is an exception - I think Sawyers sharpened their own tools but even there I'm not positive.
Assuming you mean pit sawyers, you're absolutely right. Since they sawed more or les continuously, sharpening was also far to regular a requirment to allow for "sending out".
Salaman says the top sawyer (the senior man) was responsible for sharpening.
BugBear
"Japanese saws and frame saws. I think the age of the dominance of japanese saws is drawing to a close. In my view, they offer no advantages for the average woodworker beyond the fact (and this is a big fact) that they are made well and are ready for use "out of the box". Now that Mike Wenz is producing saws, pull saw users can finally see what a western saw can do."I've read through this thread -- there's been a lot of very good information.I'd like to expand on this issue a bit. I can see that western saw are of higher quality today than, say, 10-15 years ago. But are there any advantages of a western saw over a Japanese saw, assuming that they are set and sharpened up to an equally optimal degree?
Are there advantages of western saws over pull saws?
Well the saws were developed for different users, working in different conditions with very different technologies. Comparing them in any given shop is somewhat unfair. I prefer japanese saws for site work and have recommended (and supplied) them to my boatbuilding family members (with polished mahogany handles!). That said, I've never seen anyone with any hand saw, rip a boards as fast as I can with an 18th c saw*.
My sense is that the popularity of japanese saws stems not from the superiority of their design but rather the lack of comparable western saws. Mike Wenz changed that.
Since most of us are working in shops standing up with workbenches and vises and saw horses, I suspect the saws developed for this sort of work (the western push saws) will be preferred.
Adam
*those of you who would like to play the "beat the master" home edition, ripping eastern white pine, 4/4 s4s, I can hold a line ripping 1" per stroke, 1-1/2 strokes per second. I can rip almost 2" per stroke in a rough cut. 5/4 pine isn't much different. Hardwoods (black walnut) I do about half as well (tho my saw is optimized specifcally for soft woods - I've yet to make a hardwood saw)
I do primarily use Japanese saws. I'm curious now -- I'll have to go home and see how fast I can rip a board with the one ryoba I have.What's the TPI on your ripping saw?By the way, the big advantage I see with a Japanese saw is that they work on the pull stroke, so you maintain tension on the blade as it cuts, which helps (me, at least) to stay on line*. Also, the blade can be thinner with this design. I do agree that this is all part of a system. Japanese workbenches and holding techniques are much different from what is typically in a western style woodworking workshop.*Not to say that you can't do the same thing with a western saw, except that the blade will be thicker.
+ Standard rip and crosscut
For the rip, spend between $25 and $100 and land yourself a good older (look for a better and more shaped handle as an easy way tp id the old ones) Disston with a 5 or 7 tpi rip tooth file. In my experience the thumb hole type handle is not necessary.
For a crosscut, again a Disston, Atkins or the like vintage saw is great. I suggest 10 to 12 tpi as although a slightly slower cut, the finished cut is smoother. These can be had in the $25 to $100 price range as well.
+ Dovetail
The LN dovetail saw works very well:
http://www.lie-nielsen.com/images/dovetailsaw.jpg
and though not cheap, is reasonable and readily available.
I also like the dozuki available from tools for working wood recommended in FWW a few issues back:
http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/Merchant/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=toolshop&Product_Code=MS-JS340&Category_Code=TSJ
+ Tennon
The large LN filed rip is my personal choice:
http://www.lie-nielsen.com/images/tenonsaw.jpg
The carcass saw is a great little backsaw for precise cross cutting like tenon shoulders etc.
http://www.lie-nielsen.com/images/carcass_new.jpg
+ Offset (for flush cutting of through tennons etc.)
Lee Valley's is great. The double sided one is the most practical as ... wait for it ... it has two edges so lasts twice as long.
The japanese ones are fine too.
+ Mitre
I have that swedish hand miter box - bow saw on a swing kind of thing - which I used extensively before a I bought my SCMS. It worked fine. So would any good back saw with a wood jig if you are reasonably skilled.
I also like Japanese saws a great deal. The Ryoba is handy with its cross cut and rip blade configurations of the same saw. I use it alot to block out carvings. I've already mentioned the dozukis.
Many thanks for those responses. A couple of follow-on questions if you don't mind:
Adam: What is a tall toe, relatively speaking? Also, I am not sure I follow on the coarse teeth. Are you suggesting fewer teeth is better (ala rip saws but set for crosscut, of course)?
Samson: DIsston seems to be the vintage saw of choice. Are there grades of which one should be aware?
I do have a Sanderson-Newbold crosscut saw and a Ramada rip saw (Portugese, I think) that have been around for many years with minimal use as I generally use power saws. I also have a Tyzack-Turner Excalibur No. 1 Nonpareil tennon saw. I am drawn to mastering the old saws -- just because I grew up watching my father and grandfather make lots of stuff with them-- however, it is hard enough to master a new skill set without having to fight a sup-par tool to get results. Does anyone know about these saws? Do I need to replace them?
I like the 7 and 12's best, though they are more expensive. But I have 23s and 8's too, and have no real complaints. Some details about the differences can be found here:
http://www.vintagesaws.com/cgi-bin/frameset.cgi?left=saws&right=saws.html
I do have a Sanderson-Newbold crosscut saw and a Ramada rip saw (Portugese, I think) that have been around for many years with minimal use as I generally use power saws. I also have a Tyzack-Turner Excalibur No. 1 Nonpareil tennon saw. I am drawn to mastering the old saws -- just because I grew up watching my father and grandfather make lots of stuff with them-- however, it is hard enough to master a new skill set without having to fight a sup-par tool to get results. Does anyone know about these saws? Do I need to replace them?
I imaging (from some searching) that the Sanderson-Newbold is a Thomas Flinn from some period. Should be fine, although a little rasping to soften the corners of the handle might make it more comfortable.
reworking a saw handle
I don't know anything about ramada.
The Tyzack should be a fine saw - I have several Tyzacks and they all serve well.
However, (almost) all traditional saws need to be sharp, and if these saws are old and well used, they may be blunt.
In short, and sight unseen, my guess would be that they don't need replacing, but they may well need sharpening.
BugBear
Thanks. I think you are right about Thomas Flinn. The Ramada is Portugese, and I know no more about it. The Sanderson has been lightly used, the Ramada is almost new, and the Tyzack has only been used a few times -- still has its coating and its blade guard.
If they, or any other need to be sharpened, I am not the guy for the job at the moment. Seems to be pretty tricky to find a competent sharpener, too. ANy thoughts (I am in Dallas)?
If they, or any other need to be sharpened, I am not the guy for the job at the moment. Seems to be pretty tricky to find a competent sharpener, too. ANy thoughts (I am in Dallas)?
I can only plead ignorance of good sharpening services in your area.
Hell, I can (actually) plead ignorance of good sharpening services in MY area; given the demographic dominance of hard point and/or power saws, there just ain't enough demand to maintain a high density of skilled sharpeners today.
I taught myself to saw-sharpen, but then I like messing with tools at least as much as using them.
BugBear
Well, right.
I suppose I will eventually have to learn sharpening, too, if I want to keep using handsaws. Kind of daunting right now, as I have to earn a living doing other things and have so many OTHER woodworking skills that must be brought up to par -- or should I say I lack so many other woodworking skills that I need?
Still, although I am not going to stop using power saws -- especially for carpentry -- I really do want to become at least competent with handsaws, and I really do like them better. As for the carpentry, we live on a country place with barns and buildings and I just don't have time to do all the repair and construction by hand -- and the guys I hire for occasional help wouldn't have a clue. They would look at me funny and go home as soon as they could.
Joe,
Please note that my knowledge of saws is relatively limited, so any misapprehensions that I post are subject to (a very welcome) correction by those more knowledgeable than me. Nevertheless, here are my thoughts:
Standard rip saw: 24"- 28" long; 3.5 - 7 or 8 TPI; traditional closed grip; moderate set; relatively thick, tapered (bottom to top) blade; maybe slightly breasted. Doesn't necessarily have much to do with performance, but I like the look of the nib and also like the curving tapered profile from grip to toe along the top of the blade. Moderately to heavily aggressive rake, with the last two or three inches in from the heel with somewhat less aggressive rake and filed in progressively higher TPI -- up to say 10 or 12 TPI -- for starting the cut (similar to what is done on many Japanese-style saws; a very useful feature).
Standard cross cut saw: 24"- 28" long; 7 or 8 - 12 TPI; traditional grip; moderate set; relatively thick, tapered blade. Doesn't necessarily have much to do with performance, but I like the look of the nib and also like the curving tapered profile from grip to toe along the top of the blade. Moderately to heavily aggressive rake, with the last two or three inches in from the heel with somewhat less aggressive rake and filed in progressively higher TPI -- up to say 13 or 14 TPI -- for starting the cut (similar to what is done on many Japanese-style saws; a very useful feature). Don't know enough about/have enough experience with differences in fleam to be able to say anything intelligent about it at this time.
Rip panel saw: 18"- 20" long; 3.5 - 7 or 8 TPI; traditional grip; moderate set; medium thick, tapered blade; maybe breasted. More or less the same comments as above for the standard rip saw but for a somewhat smaller/shorter saw.
Cross cut panel saw: 18"- 20" long; 7 or 8 - 12 TPI; traditional grip; moderate set; medium thick, tapered blade. More or less the same comments as above for the standard cross-cut saw but for a somewhat smaller/shorter saw.
Dovetail saw: 8" - 10" long; 1.5" - 2.5" depth of cut; 12 - 16 TPI; rip cut; relatively thin blade; light/minimal set; heavy brass back; traditional open pistol grip.
Tenon saw: 10" - 16" long; 2" - 3.5" depth of cut; 12 - 16 TPI; rip cut and cross cut; medium thin blade; medium set; heavy brass back; traditional open or closed grip.
Mitre saw: 16" - 20" long; 4" - 6+" depth of cut; 12 - 18 TPI; cross cut; relatively thick blade; moderate set; heavy brass back; traditional open or closed grip. No comments on fleam -- see above.
Offset saw: Never used a Western-style flush cut saw; have used the Japanese-style and find that there is excellent control with the pull cut; would take a while for me to get used to pushing for flush cuts.
Things to avoid:
Improperly shaped grips;
Plastic grips;
Too much/too little set for the intended function of the saw;
Unequal set (i.e., improperly done set);
Too thick/thin of a blade for the intended function of the saw.
The above comments are based on my fairly limited experience with the LN dovetail and small cross-cut saws, an old Stanley miter box saw, a couple of old Disston rip and cross-cut full-sized saws, a Disston panel-size rip saw, and a Lakeside (mfg by Disston?) cross-cut saw. Except for the LNs, all of these saws were acquired at either yard sales or from a local used tool dealer. I've been teaching myself how to sharpen and set, with some reasonable success, but still have a ways to go.
_____
A couple of saw styles not mentioned by the OP are Western-style bow/turning saws and frame saws. Bow/turning saws are useful for making curved cuts in things like Cabriole legs. Frame saws can be used for re-sawing, among other things. Not enough experience yet with either of these saw types to make any really useful comments.
_____
Maybe a couple of folks like Mike Wenz could chime in here with their experience and expertise....
.
Tschüß!
James
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that...."
--A.C. Clarke
Edited 3/6/2007 1:52 pm by pzgren
James (pzgren):
If I read you aright, you are giving essentially the same specs for standard rip and crosscut, except that the set would be different. Is that right?
Let me second the next poster's question about technique. We talk about chisel and plane techinque by the thousands of words, but do nothear much about saws (the COlonial Williamsburg videos are sure interestin, though).
Joe,
<<If I read you aright, you are giving essentially the same specs for standard rip and crosscut, except that the set would be different. Is that right?>>
More or less: After looking at these two saws for a while when I first got them, the only readily discernable differences I could find were that one was filed rip and the other cross-cut; the rip saw is 3½ TPI (marked on the heel) while the cross-cut is filed at 5 or 5½ TPI (don't remember which, but also marked on the heel) (both confirmed by measuring); and the grip shapes are minorly different. Other than that, there were no differences that I remember at the moment (it's been about four or five months since I bought the saws, and I don't have them handy right now).
.<!----><!----><!---->
Tschüß!<!----><!---->
<!----><!---->James<!----><!---->
<!----> <!---->
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that...."
--A.C. Clarke
Unless you're crosscutting logs, I think you may want at least 8 tpi in a standard cross cut saw. Am I missing something?
And, Joe, the difference is not only in the set (i.e., how much alternating teeth lean out to form the kerf), the teeth shapes (angles) and sharpening angles on the faces of the teeth are quite different as well. Think of cross cutting teeth as jack knife blades and rip teeth as chisels. The slicing (across the grain) teeth can be closer together as there is less waste to clear. The chiseling rip teeth are removing tiny shavings if you will and need more space to allow for waste removal.
Right. I'm with you about set, angle, etc. Sloppy use of language by me. Sorry.
Samson,
As you're no doubt well aware, higher TPI generally = smoother cut. The 5½ TPI cross-cut saw works well enough -- it still needs more work to get it back into proper shape, something that I'm learning how to do as I go -- and is pretty fast cutting, but the resulting surface is a bit on the rough side. OTOH, I don't worry about it too much, as the next place the piece just cut normally goes is to the shooting board to square it up and trim it exactly to length; it also has the side benefit of taking care of the roughness.
There's a lot I left out of my reply, mainly because I didn't have the saws on-hand to examine again. Like many other aspects of (hand tool) woodworking, there's a lot more to this hand sawing business and to hand saws than initially meets the eye.
This thread has been very educational for me.
Thank you -- and all the other contributors -- for helping educate me on hand saws and sawing!!
.<!----><!----><!---->
Tschüß!<!----><!---->
<!----><!---->James<!----><!---->
<!----> <!---->
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that...."
--A.C. Clarke
Joe,
Adam mentioned Mike Wenzloff (mwenz on this forum). I have 3 of his saws and they are very fine; more importantly, they are very functional too. They track beautifully, leave a clean cut and are comfortable to use for long periods.
The saws for M&Ts (one crosscut, one rip) are 16 inches long; their weight and length do seem to help the process. Mike makes many other types of saw, including strange ones you might specify to him.
I have cut 500+ DTs, around 40 tenons and about 90 finger joints with these saws in the last couple of months or so. These are the first hand sawn joints I've made. I believe that the quailty of the saws and their performance has made this introduction to handsawn joinery easy and succesful for me. I just had to learn how to saw, not how to deal with an errant tool.
My new-found skills (and the saws) are currently at work on an afromosia Greene & Greene desk - not timber or a project I would want to risk with either a lack of skill or badly-performing tools. The Wenzloffs have helped built my confidence as well as the skill.
My learning experience could easily have been a chore, using cheap saws with bad set, generic tooth pattern (instead of rip or crosscut for the right purpose), uncomfortable handle-angle/feel and lack of sharpness - all common failings with even some expensive saws, according to various reviews on the web.
Mike's website: http://wenzloffandsons.com/saws/
Adria (in Canada) make similary well-received saws of Wenzloff quality.
The only other saws I have used are Zonas of 24 and 32 tpi. Despite being very cheap (around $12-15) they cut very well indeed, albeit slowly. Their kerf is ultra-thin (good for small, delicate DTs) and they cut on the pull stroke.
They are miniaturised backsaws which may be meant for modellers and such. But they are very handy for the delicate and small joints of little boxes and similar. They will do normal-sized DTS and similar, if you don't mind their slow cut.
Lataxe
Hi Joe,
I am usually reluctant to enter a thread once my name is mentioned, so what follows is fairly generic information. I also wish to respond to a statement in your post: ...but the whole question of good WESTERN handsaws still begs for a thorough treatment.
I agree that contemporary information appears sparse, but there are pieces here and there. Adam had a good article in PopWood about handsaw selection. I forget the issue # and my magazine cabinet blocked by a glue-up I cannot move at the moment. Perhaps Adam or another would chime in as regards the article. However, there is good information in older texts.
In general then,
Consider the work you do. There is no sense in owning a coarse 19" large tenon saw if you only cut 1" wide by 3/4" tenons.
There is no sense in owning a 26" or a 28" 5 ppi rip saw if you will not be ripping your lumber by hand.
There is no sense owning a lone DT saw of 22 ppi if you also cut DTs into 5/4 carcasses. [Well, actually I don't think anyone should own a 22 ppi DT saw, but that's another story <g>.]
There is not a lot of sense in owning an offset saw for cutting plugs and dowels if one does not use them. And even if you do, there are other types of saws which perhaps are better suited.
A lot of negativity, but I could go on.
The converse of those statements are equally sensible, though. What I am trying to communicate is that one should make themselves aware first of what it is they either make or intend to make, the woods one uses or intend to use. In one sense, the answers, or the awareness, to those issues become problems to resolve.
One should become aware of the kinds of saws a person would have used 150 or more years ago to solve those problems--and where one can compromise in order to work the broadest with what they have. There is rarely a single good answer to be found in that search. But there are general guides. Look into the Seaton or Duncan Phyfe chests and you'll find several saws. These men expected to make a broad range of furniture using those saws. In the case of Phyfe, he certainly did. In Benjamin Seaton's case life interrupted his plans, at least furniture as a commercial endeavor. There is an overlap concerning those saws.
...what should a bunch of allegedly practical guys like us look for, either new or used, that will give us genuinely high quality performance and service in each of the following categories (again, please, only those items that are reasonably likely to be available):
As regards new, nearly any saw you can use in a shop--or in the woods in some cases--is available new. If not from one vendor in particular cases then from another.
JUST AS IMPORTANTLY, WHAT SHOULD BE AVOIDED?
If going for vintage saws? Simply ones without cracked plates, no bends or worse, kinks. Lots of life left as Adam mentioned. There are many good vintage saws out there still. Including those you indicate as being the best, mid-19th century British saws. I know because I have a bunch of them.
If going for new? Can't answer that one other than to say to decide how much you are willing to spend on each category of saw you decide you need.
Regardless of new or vintage, learn to sharpen your saws. There's a lot of free information and some DVDs which will show you how. If the thought of learning to sharpen a handsaw makes you a tad queasy, go find a cheap garage sale [boot sale for our British friends] with large teeth and learn on it. It's no big deal once you've cut your teeth on one or two [OK, sorry for the bad pun].
Well, I stopped working to make some coffee and it has finished dripping.
Take care, Mike
Mike:
What a wonderfully interesting thread. Really didn't expect you to make an appearance, especially after I spent quite a while staring covetously at the saws on your web site, but believe me, I appreciate your doing so.
Of course, now I have another skill to learn -- that of saw sharpening.
Part of my problem is that I really like tools and equipment. I tend to accumulate tools (not collect, as I intend to use them), and learn to use them as time permits, or opportunity, or necessity require. Living as we do on a rural property with a barn, horses, gardens outbuildings, and little help other than that which can be bribed or extorted from the children (a generally losing proposition), my wood skills run to carpentry at which I am fairly good. Yet, I would really like to further develop my cabinet skills, and I would like to do it more with hand tools than power tools. Why? Purely for the satisfaction.
Am presently designing some saddle stands to be made of oak from my property which will require large and strong mortise and tenon joints, possibly dovetails, and other joints and fittings the names of which I do not know. Have a coffee table and a couple of end tables on the drawing board to be made of the same materials, and also bookcases.
We have some crossover projects going, too, such as a soon to be started timberframed outbuilding, and a large rustic table made of birch logs in the bark, and more of the oak.
So, to return to the main point of the thread, I am as likely to cut fairly large tenons as I am smaller ones. Certainly dovetails. Certainly crosscuts of dry white oak (quercus alba -- the real thing -- and also bur oak) of which I have a great abundance. As to ripping, I just don't know. Maybe just for fun, at least occasionally.
So, if I follow you, Adam and the others, I should accumulate short and long tenon saws, a carcase saw, and a dovetail saw, and at least a good crosscut saw. Does this sound right? Given lots of oak and some walnut, occasional Osage Orange, and sometimes other woods, what toothing would you suggest?
Now, to really show my ignorance, what is the utility of a panel saw, or a half -back saw?
ALso, what are the necessary (and best) tools for sharpening?
Hi Joe,
I'll start with this, ALso, what are the necessary (and best) tools for sharpening?
Best? Dunno. Certainly good files are needed. I prefer Grobet and Bahco. Grobet you can get from Lie-Nielsen, Bahco from Pete Taran at the Vintage Saws web site. But Nicholsons from a variety of sources are good enough, especially if you read the advice for file size and drop one size or subset of size. So for the Nicholsons if a given chart says a 6" Slim, I would use a 6" double extra slim. That sort of thing.
For the Grobet and Bahco you can pretty much use the recommended sizes. The point is that for small, higher ppi teeth the width of the aris becomes more important. The larger the radius of the aris the smaller the teeth which are created. Big small teeth are better than little small teeth. Hope I didn't confuse too many there.
A vise for holding the saws is necessary. But that can range from a shop-made one to a vintage cast iron one. Important that there be no or extremely little vibration during filing. So over the entire length of the toothline the saw plate needs held tightly.
Good lighting is necessary and for small teeth magnification is a good thing.
A flat file for jointing. A holder for the flat file is nice and can also be either shop-made, a vintage one obtained, or even a new one from Lee Valley. The one from Lee Valley is nice and can be used for jointing scrapers easily.
Reading on the Vintage Saws web site about saw sharpening is a great start. And at BugBear's [Paul Womak] web site has a good set of link in this regard:http://www.geocities.com/plybench/saw_sharpen.htmlNote that BB also has some shop-made gizmos for helping keep track of fleam and rake angles during filing.
Your list of saws is a great start and may be all you need-if you even need all of them. I would worry about obtaining them as needed or anticipated except where there is overlap with life on the property. Them I would simply get.
For the saddle stands if you are going to saw the joints then a long tenon saw is handy. But you can also cut those large-scale joints with a rip panel saw which may or may not have more utility down the road. Depending on the design of the stand, DTs may well be overkill. 8/9 ppi is good on larger scale tenons. Certainly if the joints are less than the usable height on a backsaw one will work rather well. But starting the cuts with a smaller backsaw and once the kerf is established a panel saw can take over well.
Timber framed buildings I would classify as the largest of the large projects one may ever tackle. For those, large heavy handsaws are tops. Low PPI. I am making a few saws for a gentleman in Norway who does this for a living. Two cross cuts and a rip. Eventually he also wants a 5' pit saw. We'll see, but I'm game. These are two 28" cross cuts with a lightly breasted blade. 6 ppi. 7 7/8" at the heel and 3 3/4" at the toe. Rip is the same dimension, but 4 ppi. .042" saw plate on all and taper ground. You may get away with just cross cut saws for the shoulder cuts and split off the cheeks and smooth out with an axe, adze or a good slick. It would depend on the grain of the timber used. But I would start out splitting them off before rip sawing them. Faster and less effort.
For furniture, the standard fair of DT, carcass and sash saws can be helpful. PPIs would range once again on the typical thicknesses and woods used. Oak is one of those woods which can be grabby so a relaxed rake and or a little higher PPI than if one is sawing Cherry and or Poplar is nice. Go for the worse case woods and the nicer sawing woods will cut easy too--just maybe not as fast.
All of those saws are listed at any given time on eBay for vintage saws. It's where I have gotten many of my favorite vintage saws [just won a great 22" 8 ppi Turner & Davies back saw for a reasonably gloatable price, meep meep]. There are a few top sellers of hand saws on the 'Bay. They sell only good saws, well sharpened. You can also reduce the risk by paying a bit more from vintage tool dealers.
Take care, Mikewho's gotta go eat some food now...
Here is another saw question. What do you guys use to cut curves that are too big for a fret/coping saw, or an stock too thick for those saws? In other words, what is the equivalent of a bandsaw? A bowsaw of some kind?
Hi Joe. Yep, one would use a turning saw or bow saw. In the last few months, Joel at Tools for Working Wood introduced a nice bow saw and he also sells the individual parts. Check it out. Nice looking saw.
Turning Saw:http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/Merchant/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=toolshop&Product_Code=GT-BOWSAW12&Category_Code=TMQ
For the parts:http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/Merchant/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=toolshop&Product_Code=GT-BOWS.XX&Category_Code=TMQ
Take care, Mike
mike,
you ever try your hand at making bow saws?
Hi, I've made a few. It's a fun project to use up a rainy day while being in the shop.
I started one last Sunday evening and will probably finish it tomorrow sometime as it doesn't look like my wife and I are going to get out of Dodge like planned. Made from Jatoba, some brass and steel pins.
For ease of making a turning saw [a smaller bowsaw], note that Joel at Tools for Working Wood has the harder parts to do for oneself, the hardware. He also sells the completed saw. The blades he sells look great.
The one I am making is for testing some longer larger blades I made so I can test them before mailing them off. My last one was a more usable size for furniture making. Anymore, the turning saw-sized one is all I use. Think of it as a larger fret saw made from wood. Most of the time I use it for furniture, it is for pierced work in stock no thicker than 18 mm and usually much thinner. For handsaws, it is what I use half the time to remove the waste inside a handle.
Take care, Mike
Friends:
This continues to be an absolutely fascinating and valuable thread, at least for me. As you can all recognize, I am a pretty green behind the gills woodworker -- although not exactly new. Still, to precise cabinet-quality work and some hand tools, I am green. Let me once again thank all of you for your responses to me and to each other.
To a careful observer, even your disagreements are valuable. It is so with all skilled activities. People try to find the best way to do things -- by their own lights, and they WILL differ. Hearing and trying to understand the differences is one of the best ways for others to learn. I have much experience and some skill at photography, horsemanship, and some other physical activities with significant mental components. The nature of the debates is similar, despite the dissimilarity of the topics.
Now, to try to summarize the key points of what I think I have learned on this thread:
1) Some saws are much better than others, but once you have good dimensions and metallurgy, the differences between so-so and good are in the teeth and those can be changed by skilled people to suit themselves
2) The best of saws (as opposed to the merely good ones) have blades with advanced features such as: tapering from botom to top to allow blade clearance in the kerf and reduce binding; blade geometry that is designed entirely for efficiency of cut rather than economy of materials; breasting; differential tooth count, with higher PPI at the front and back to ease starting; and finer, more comfortable and efficient handles.
3) "Tracking" is in part a matter of skill, but it can be greatly aided or impeded by proper tooth set;
4) The teeth of all good saws will need to be resharpened from time to time. There are few sharpening left, so someone wishing to do much work with handsaws needs to get files and learn the art;
6) Good sawyery is as much a skill as good planecraft, so practice, practice, practice.
I forgot to mention in my lessons learned summary that I also learned a fair amount about different types of saws from the discussion and various guys' web sites.Now, to chime in with one disagreement with Adam -- that being the reason for sharpening services. There are many kinds of things that we know how to do, but prefer not to for any number of reasons. I have a guy who does my compute service, despite the fact that I can do most of it myself. We use a farrier to trim our horses feet, despite a fair amount of skill and experience doing it. I prefer to have someone elae paint my house, if I can afford it at the time.In economic terms, this is called division and specialization of labor. People focus on what they do best and farm out other things to specialists.Saw sharpening is a specialty that seems to be ideal for farming out.
Speaking of sharpening, I found Tom Law's DVD to be useful (as well as Pete Taran's articles from FTJ back issues and vintage saws web site):
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2nwp6/saw/saws.htm
FWIW
Adam, reality in the "current age" is that ALL of the framers, trim carpenters and cabinet makers in my world growing up in the 1950's and 60's would give their saws to an old Norwegian widow on Friday afternoon and pick them up on Sunday evening or very early on Monday on the way to the job. WHY? Well there are several reasons .
1. The saws were dull after working all week and sharpening would take away from drinking time. That might sound humerous but these guys from Norway, Sweeds, Finns and Irish were hard workers AND hard players in their free time.
2. She would sharpen a Disston or Atkins so that you could sit a sewing needle on the teeth and watch it ride the legnth of the saw with out deflection, all for a few dollars. I wish that she was with us today as I would drive 50 miles to give her my saws as I did my daddy's(that was one of my chores and I always got a piece of home made candy) and drive 50 miles back to get them when they were done because I would never demand a finish time and expect perfect saws.
3. The work was serious and much of it was "on the road" and there were 5 or 6 guys, all from Norway who bought an old herse from a mortician. They had the engine, transmission and suspension rebuilt and installed beach chairs in the back, loaded their tool boxes in the back, drove from Bay Ridge Brooklyn as the bars closed (after a stop at the local Greek dinner for breakfast) to a high class area of Conn. and framed a house IN A DAY.
The summary here is WHY would a craftsman waste his more profitable time in such a mundane task , which I am sure he had the skill to do(as must I as I have no recourse) when he could be making valuable product?
I think that you have just peed on your own shoes, for shame. Paddy
Hi PaddyI grew up in a family of boat builders. This was in the 70's before the luxury tax killed the industry. They had no electric cordless tools in those days and the hull of a 48' schooner has no room for a table saw or band saw. There were just a few electric drills, jig saws, yankee screwdrivers, and sharp saws and chisels. Otherwise, you'd have to schlep up the ladder, out of the boat, cross the scaffolding, climb down the ladder just to make a cut. Get the picture? So they did unconventional things.I watched my Dad, a world famous designer and builder, hold a saw between his knees and run a board over it because there was no room to saw. I vividly remember watching my Uncle Frit sharpen his saw in a saw vise of his own making- two boards held together with a hinge, placed in a machinist vise. These men made million dollar sailboats that today remain the best in the world. They sharpened their own saws. One more story?
I remember watching dear Uncle Joe rip a thick piece of mahogany with a hand saw on horses. Uncle Joe was a strong, compact, and quiet man. I was bored as usual and sitting in the sunshine outside the open garage door of the shop. My father, then sick with cancer, was uncharacteristically sitting with me. He said "Look there. That man has every tool there is right there in that shop and see the tool he's chosen. He can rip that board as fast with that saw as he can with a machine."I had few conversations with my Dad after that so I remember that one. Uncle Joe passed only recently and I had a chance to ask him about that story. He didn't recall it of course. Using a hand saw was nothing special to him. With skill like his, he had his choice of tools to use. He may have preferred to work in the sun that day.So in my mind, and perhaps like many of the folks reading here, it comes down to a choice: What sort of woodworking skills do you want? Whose work would you prefer to emulate? The finest cabinetmakers of the 18th century, these fine boat builders of my family perhaps, or 5 drunk Norwegians driving around in a hearse? :)AdamP.S. Uncle Frit (who made his own saw vise) is steering the schooner in this picture. In the other picture you can see the sort of work these men did. That is all solid mahogany and the floor (sole) is solid teak with holly inlay.Edited 3/4/2007 9:29 pm ET by AdamCherubini
Edited 3/4/2007 9:39 pm ET by AdamCherubini
ADAM, THAT WAS A VERY CHEAP SHOT at a bunch of very talented wood workers who never failed to produce the very best home construction and finish work , with out power tools. You knew the ethic but you in your heat (vanity) chose to degrade them , not for their talent and excelence but because they party'd hearty the night before. You forget that I come from a seafaring heritage on both sides and there were as many drunks and wastrels on the waterfront (if not more-in my memory) than in the wood working crowd. You have peed on your shoes again my friend. I have been there, I didn't need to research this.
Again I will say that your historic perspective on the work that we aspire to is nothing short of priceless, please do not yuck it up with personal attitudes. Paddy
A very common mistake of those commenting on how things were done in the distant past is to take limited information and make sweeping conclusions. Life in the past was as complicated and diverse as it is today, but in different ways that we don't always recognize. The sources we have today are not always broadly representative of how things were done in the past.
6 minutes of battery leftHere's the point David-when the rubber hits the road you must accomplish the work, the question always arrises whether the problem is me (or you) or the tool. The point here is that its sometimes the tool. The saws we have are carpenters saws not made or designed for cabinet work. If you want to cabinetry, there are better saws from an earlier age. In my view better work was done then, by better skilled and trained craftsmen. Not everything was better. But cabinetry appears to have been better before 1840. Ditto for saws. That's it.As for sweeping generalities, any fool can say it varies (I'm NOT calling you a fool- this is an answer I get alot). People read me because I can distill what I've learned into something concrete. The 1840 date really isn't importnat to this discussion. What is is that these early saw designes are better. Okay?I made it!Adam
PS good night everybody!
Adam, a truly beautiful boat but my experience was a bit less pretty.
1. a two masted trawler owned by a Mr. Travis (a very lucky man as he had 5 big strapping sons) that we would lay over on the sand bar as the tide ran out to scrape, caulk with oakum and paint, then turn her about with a dory at high tide to do the other side.
2. the Elizabeth ll, a 50'+ fishing boat built by my Grand dad and Uncle Phil from trees lugged by mare in chains from the woods, pit sawed the plank .. had an Arcadia fly wheel magnito engine that WOULD run backwards if ya didn't catch her right. These guys in Fox Harbour Newfoundland sharpened their own saws because there was no other recourse.
3. the Delight, a 47.75' sea skiff built in the 1940's for a coastal Virginia plantation owner and used for coast patrol in WWll. She was double planked lap strake copper/monel rivitted, only had 3 boards that didn't run the length of her and ya couldn't put a pack of cigaretts between her ribs. We pulled the straight 8 Chrysler and refitted a Detroit 671 with a 24x24 wheel to get her up to 14 kts., a full new deck w/ scuppers and new knees, stern post bits and transome. She ran as a fishing charter (two chairs, four out riggers) out of Lake Montauk and later Amityville . I asked my Father if he wanted to join us one weekend running for tuna and he said " no thanks, I didn't lose anything out there. my boy"
BTW, several years ago I bought a cast iron saw vise made in Tn. late 1800's for $23 and brought it back to my new digs in East Tn last Dec. as I do sharpen all my saws -I also have no other recourse. Paddy
An interesting thread. I accept some correction from Testtest, but I'll bet money that that was not always the case, and depended very much on the size of the town or location of the business. I doubt that every place there was a furniture shop, or other wood working shop, that there also was a sharpening shop. There must be a number of shops before a committed sharpener could survive( you have to sharpen something all the time to make it pay). As to an apprentice being free labor, I didn't mean that, but it certainly cost less to keep a apprentices than a competent worker, and some one swept the floor and did the menial work. Where would a craftsman learn to sharpen chisels, planes,and saws? I'm sure there were dedicated places for sharpeners, but probably only in larger towns and cities.
IMHO
Pedro
At one time, well into the 20th century, there were itinerant utensel sharpeners who would do knives, scissors, axes, and whatever someone handed off to them. Even in the United States, they would ply routes in larger cities and attract business by a singsong call. This worked in the pre-air-copnditioning days when people had open windows a good part of the year -- and they would be in certain neighborhoods on certain days. I remember them from Chicago in the 1950, along with hotdog vendors and other long-vanished occupations.Isn't it possible that itinerant sharpeners serviced saws as well? Pure speculation, of course...
Here in NYC the last time I saw an itenerent knive sharpener was around 10 years ago. THat is to say a guy with a foot powered grindstone on his back ringing a bell for work. When I was a kid in the 60's it was a reasonably common sight. THe iterant knife sharpener still exists however - but these days they drive a van. There were itinerent saw sharpeners who would hang around construction sites and I would guess go from workshop to workshop looking for work. (note: today in NYC it is pretty common on wall street to have shoe shine men go from floor to floor to office to office shining shoes. Once they have permission to get into the building they find out who like to get their shoes regularly shined and lots of other people will occasionally flag them down for a shine as they wander the offices and cubicles. Save oddles of time for the employees and for the shiners - sort of like itinerant saw sharpeners - you go where the work is)
Edited 3/5/2007 10:28 pm ET by testtest
Hi Joel,
I lived in NY for 8 years, and moved away 2 1/2 years ago. There was an itinerant knife sharpener in Brooklyn, in a red van/truck that looked like a former milk truck or bread delivery vehicle. He slowly drove around on Saturdays and rang a bell. It was all very nostalgic and authentic, right down to his accent and wizened old world appearance. You paid him $5 and he would proceed to skillfully ruin whatever knife you gave him. Don't ask me how I know that! Fahgetaboutit!
-Andy
j, the sharpeners in my old Brooklyn were "Marvelous" you would hear their 'ding, ding, ding' of their hand struck bell and all the house wives would appear with their scissors and kitchen knives and they were well done for only a few bucks.
The shoe shine guys were another matter. Having worked in several very major mid town buildings the shoe shine guys (who did beautiful work) had to either have the grand blessing of a VERY SENIOR executive or kicked in a % to the building manager to make a very profitable living. What a life? Paddy
BTW. there is an old story about the guy who shined Mr. (John D.) Rockafeller's shoes for years who asked him one day why he only gave him a 10 cent tip while his son gave him a quarter. Mr. John D. responded that his son had a very rich father. pfh.
Joe, that's not quite a dead trade yet, to my surprise. I recently moved to a pretty nice suburb of Washington DC. Not the really rich ones, but pretty nice. Imagine my surprise a few months after we moved there to find an itinerant sharpener plying his trade in our neighborhood from a van?!? Seriously, just like you mention, he'd sharpen knives, scissors, what have you, and advertised by driving slowly around the neighborhood ringing a bell on the van. I'm sure his overhead is low, but I was very surprised to see it.
When I was an undergrad (management economics in the late 70's) I did an assignment on the organisation of a 'real' business. One of my great uncles ran a timber window business in Melbourne and gave us the run of the place for two days.
All of the work was machine work hand assembled, but much of it was custom sizes and styles. The skilled employees worked in two places in the shop, marking out the custom work and sharpening. Actually using the machine tools (docking saws, chain morticer, planner and jointer) were often done by less skilled staff, including apprentices.
Patto,
I am sure that methods of work have changed through time, and with different machines available and what have you, and importance of accuracy being the same, the skilled workers would be where the most accuracy is needed. This can easily be in setting up a machine, and then any dolt can feed it. I still think that in the 1700 and 1800 work shops, apprenticeses did all the menial tasks, and some of those tasks would be sharpening plane blades and chisels, and maybe, depending on the shop location and availability, saws. I have my granddads saw set, and have seen them in old work shops, so they were used there. How would a craftsman learn to sharpen stuff if they wern't taught, and how was the teaching done? As an apprenticship. I wasn't there, I have done no research on this, so I don't preport to "know", but it makes sense to me. I have a feeling that the old timers didn't spend the time and toys we do on the fine and infinite detail of sharpening that we do, and just did it and got on with it. IMHO
Pedro
I know, this was just one observation from a large modernprofessional shop. Differently, I have worked with my father where he has been doing a lot of repetetive work with a paring chisel on end-grain softwood and I have stood next to him sharpening his chisels (I got the set sharp while he did the work but had to do several a few times)
Dave
exactly, I see you in the role of an apprentice.
Pedro
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled