New Bronze age for handsaws continues, Two's Company!

[Alan DuBoff]

The new bronze age for handsaws continues...

Cobbled together a saw today...in bronze, a xcut joiners saw.

Matched pair in bronze. If anyone is heading to the LN Hand Tool Event in Oakland tomorrow at the Crucible, I'm going to take these up there if you care to look at them.

(linky pic to more info and photo gallery)

http://traditionaltoolworks.com/saws/bronze-joiner-xcut/joiner-saws.jpg (http://blogs.traditionaltoolworks.com/aland/)

[Mike Cutler]

Alan. Those look great!

San Jose is a bit far for me today though.;)
I attended the event in Sturbridge Mass. I thought it went very well. Good luck.

[Dave Spaeder]

Wow, those are really beautiful!

[Ray Gardiner]

Hi Alan,

Nice work, good to have a matched pair. How have you found the bronze
as far a weight goes? How much denser is bronze than brass?

Regards
Ray

[Alan DuBoff]

Mike, Dave, Ray, thanks for the kind words.

Ray,

Not sure exactly how bronze is against brass in weight, nor that it matters. I have seen folks mention they prefer the weight of a heavy back to provide weight for ease of cutting, but not sure I buy into that. I have light saws with sharp teeth that cut fine.

I find that some of the lighter saws are actually more desirable, and as a case in point the first bronze saw I made out of 3/16" x 1/2" and this newest one has a 1/4" x 1/2" back. Both work, and close in weight but the 3/16" is lighter. One of the reasons I made that one small is that bronze is stonger, so I felt it would be ok. It seems so.

To be honest, weight is not one of the criteria I used in selecting bronze though, it is just a better alloy, IMO.

Alloys without iron do not rust, since rust is a reaction that happens to iron, but alloys such as brass and bronze will tarnish, and that green color tarnish is referred to as patina. This tarnish can be different for the material based on a few things, the oxygen/air, the amount of moisture, and the amount of salt being the primary ones. While brass will not rust, similar to bronze, it has a lot of zinc in it which bronze doesn't have, bronze has a similar amount of tin however. In a salt environment the zinc can be leached out of the brass, leaving it like a copper sponge. This is my main criteria for using bronze, and the properties of working with it...it is clearly a better material. This is not to mention it just is captivating to work with it, and the pink hue has me smitten.

Had a great conversation with Konrad Sauer today at the Lie-Nielsen Hand Tool Event in Oakland, CA. Didn't realize that Konrad will not use brass parts on his planes, although their website does say brass or bronze on their pages (I noticed after I got home), Konrad said he doesn't use it. He mentioned how lousy of a material brass is to work with, and as such only uses bronze.

Not only did he agree with my assessment of bronze, he mentioned almost immediately when I showed him my saws, "it's about time someone made some saws out of bronze". He mentioned he had been wondering when someone would do that.

Was encouraging to talk to Konrad and get his views on my saws, and/or what advice he might have for me as a toolmaker.

Konrad's planes are really nice, tried out all except the jointer, that thing looked like a battleship...:eek: Ebony infill on most of his planes, beautiful work, beautiful tools...

In contrast, was also great to try a Krenov plane that Ron Hock had, it was all lopsided, out of shape, even the bottom wasn't completely flat, but it worked perfectly and took such a beautiful thin shaving, it was just stunning...I have used Krenov's planes as a comparison to gauge my handles on, because I love the handcrafted qualities that they display. My handles are not perfect, I have rasp marks in them, they are not 100% symetrical, I just do them until they feel good and look ok. I get the impression that Krenov does his planes in a similar way to his taste, as every maker does when they make tools.

Got to talk a bunch with Mike Wenzloff, that was quality time.

[Clay Thigpen]

Ever since I joined SMC and read your posts and others about making saws I've been toying with the idea of trying my hand at it. I like the idea of using your own handmade tools. I think I should get used to sharpening saws first though. I've got a pile of old Warranted superior saws to practice on and I plan on using them to help build my workbench when I get around to that, have to get a few more tools first ;).

Other than using the Foley tooth cutter, how hard is it to cut the teeth by hand and how do temper the saw plate?

Great looking saws BTW. I like the style of the handles they look like you wouldn't notice them in your hand.

[george wilson]

I used to file them from scratch years ago. I just took a rotary file,coarse cut,and rolled it down the edge of the blade,tapping all the time with a soft hammer. That gave me equally spaced little notches.Select every 2 or 3 notches,etc. to determine teeth per inch. Start filing.

[Alan DuBoff]

Ever since I joined SMC and read your posts and others about making saws I've been toying with the idea of trying my hand at it. I like the idea of using your own handmade tools.
Clay,

Thanks for your post, I always feel good when I can inspire/encourage folks to make their own tools, and especially making and sharpening saws. While I don't have near the knowledge of many folks in the industry, I don't let that stop me from sharing the information I do have...and that is what the inet is all about.

For some reason, many of the woodworkers still don't sharpen their handsaws, and that was a common response at the LN Hand Tool Event I was at yesterday.

I think I should get used to sharpening saws first though. I've got a pile of old Warranted superior saws to practice on and I plan on using them to help build my workbench when I get around to that, have to get a few more tools first ;).
Learning to sharpen is good for all who use a handsaw. When a woodworker who uses a saw mentions they do not sharpen their own saw, I always respond to ask if they send their chisels and hand planes out also...sharpening a handsaw is not the most intuitive to start, but it's not rocket science and the teeth do not have to be perfect. Handsaw sharpening is a skill that every woodworker should have, if they use handsaws. Just like chisels and hand planes, most woodworkers would not send them out to be sharpened. Saws are really no different, so learning is the first step to recovery!;)

Other than using the Foley tooth cutter, how hard is it to cut the teeth by hand and how do temper the saw plate?
The 1095 spring steel I use is already tempered, as most all that I know of is. You can file this without having to re-temper it, just as stamping teeth can be done. It is only when you heat it up and anneal it that you will have to re-temper it.

You can do this by hand, using some templates that Leif Hanson made, but he is redoing his site, and I can't find them. I have put them on my website, and you can download them at these links if you like, and can use them to file a few saw. Just know that these were created by Leif Hanson, and his site is chalk filled with info on making saws. He shows how to fold a brass back, should you decide to go that route.

The templates are at these links:

11ppi (http://traditionaltoolworks.com/images/11ppi.pdf), 12ppi (http://traditionaltoolworks.com/images/12ppi.pdf), 13ppi (http://traditionaltoolworks.com/images/13ppi.pdf), 14ppi (http://traditionaltoolworks.com/images/14ppi.pdf), 15ppi (http://traditionaltoolworks.com/images/15ppi.pdf), 16ppi (http://traditionaltoolworks.com/images/16ppi.pdf), and 17ppi (http://traditionaltoolworks.com/images/17ppi.pdf).

To use them, put them in the vise with your saw blade, go slow, and mark each tooth, and slowly a little more at a time to try and keep them even. TAKE YOUR TIME! ;)

Another method is to use a hacksaw blade, if you can find one at the pitch you like. 16ppi is easy as you can use 1/16" marks on a ruler, as can you use 1/8" marks for 8ppi. Some ppi are difficult to find in hack saw blades though, so you might need to settle for another size if you go that route. You can use most any saw blade with the same ppi. Be careful on the hack saw blades, most are rated in TPI which is slightly different than PPI, just make sure you know. The above are all ppi, although they were tpi at some point I believe, as I pointed that out to Leif and he updated them a few years ago.

Great looking saws BTW. I like the style of the handles they look like you wouldn't notice them in your hand.
Thanks, I'll tell you where that handle originated from. It is a copy (kinda) of a the handle Mike Wenzloff designed for me on two small joinery saws (http://wenzloffandsons.com/saws/adu/adu_0002.jpg) he made for me a few years ago...they were some of his first saws. Ironic that he mentioned this handle is one of the few that he designed himself, and has only designed a few handles himself. However, take that with a grain of salt, Mike shapes handles all the time and each one is unique, even if you start from another design. You will see that mine are even different than the ones I copies the basic design from, just as most of Mike's are.

That was not accident that I copied a Wenzloff handle, I consider it to be a compliment for another maker to copy another. Mike Wenzloff has been enough help to me that I wanted to pay him that compliment.

Truth be it that I made a Joiners style saw with one of my handles which I submitted to the WoodCentral Toolmaking contest last year, but had made the handle prior to that which is on my first saw made out of bronze parts.

I had an interesting email exchange with Pete Taran over the past few days, and I'm convinced that a slotted back could actually have many advantages over a folded back. It is impossible to un-seat the blade aside from it being in a fire, as heat will loosen the epoxy. The first drop of a folded back usually renders the saw with a huge cant in the blade in appearance as the back usually pushes down. As a case in point I have very few vintage saws that this hasn't happened to.

That said, some folks have problems slotting the back, although Ray Garnier came up with a practical solution that most folks can use with a drill press.

I might be offering blades and/or backs in the future for sale, but haven't done so yet. For that matter I will most likely offer saws for sale as well, haven't done that either but have been asked by quite a few if I will. I'm just getting to the point that I have a tool that I would be proud enough to sell.

[Brian Ward]

Other than using the Foley tooth cutter, how hard is it to cut the teeth by hand and how do temper the saw plate?

It's pretty easy to cut new teeth. I've never used a retoother. Print out a tooth guide and tape it to the top of the blade, then use your thumb (or something) to guide the file.

Don't cut each whole tooth at once; just a few strokes to open a small nib, then move on to the next tooth. Then do more passes as necessary. This way, you can work out any irregularities in spacing fairly easily--on later passes, adjust pressure a little to the left or right to "move" the gap between two teeth. At some point, it becomes a regular sharpening operation.

Use a little hardwood block for the end of the file to set the rake angle, just as you would when sharpening. I like to use older, somewhat-worn files for the first couple of passes, because they're easier to start. At some point, you want to use a good, fresh file.

Can't help you with tempering, sorry.

[Alan DuBoff]

Can't help you with tempering, sorry
As far as tempering, I have never tempered a piece of steel so thin, but 1095 is carbon steel, so one way would be to take it up to a cherry red which I believe is about 1600 degrees, then quench it in oil. You would need a forge for that, AFAIK, or some heat tempering device. I don't know how you would clean it or get the scale off though, soaking in vinegar like blade smiths do would probably work.

I don't think you would want to anneal this in the first place, otherwise you WILL have to temper it! ;)

And to anneal it you would also need to take it up to a similar heat, then let it cool slowly, like in a pile of ashes.

But there is no reason to do that, this steel is only on the order of .015" - .032" thick. You can work it with a file.

[Jim Koepke]

Alan,
Thanks for sharing all the information on saw making.
it is inspirational. My intention is to start making some tools in the near future. Why buy when you can make them, right?

jim

[Clay Thigpen]

Alan, Brian, George thank you, my goal is to make a few handsaws, a half back saw and a few back saws. I really like the look of the ones with the nib and hump at the toe.

While I'm picking your collective gray matter, the backs I know can be either folded or slotted and I've seen the slotting set up that Alan has and the one that Ray has set up as well. I'm sure at some point I could set up something similar myself but is friction the only thing that keeps the plate in place? I know you can use epoxy and either pins or screws as well but I think I'd go the folded rout the first time at least any tips on selecting back material or how to set it in place on the plate?

[Alan DuBoff]

Alan,
Thanks for sharing all the information on saw making.
it is inspirational. My intention is to start making some tools in the near future. Why buy when you can make them, right?
Your most welcome, I couldn't agree more. Making your own tools that you will craft other work with is goodness in itself, there is just so much satisfaction in doing so. So many tools we can make for ourselves, from measuring to marking, to edge tools, albeit most do require some metal work.

While I'm picking your collective gray matter, the backs I know can be either folded or slotted and I've seen the slotting set up that Alan has and the one that Ray has set up as well. I'm sure at some point I could set up something similar myself but is friction the only thing that keeps the plate in place?
I use epoxy in my slotted backs, as do most everyone, AFAIK.

One thing about the folded backs is that the back sides are not parallel, more like a slight wedge in most cases, and that is difficult to grip properly with the handle mortise. Some will say that is not a problem, but the blade can cause a lot of stress and become loose over time. Mike Wenzloff mentioned to me that most all of the Peace saws which had a saw nut through the back, ended up cracked and few are not cracked across the handle cheek. Because of that he modified how he does the Peace style handles and put the top saw nut a bit low so it pins through the blade, under the back. However, the gripping of the back was something mentioned by someone other than Mike Wenzloff, he also makes folded backs. I think the majority of his saws are slotted these days though, not sure on numbers. He does sell both, and all the Kenyon style saws are done with folded backs which The Best Things sells.

There is also a case where the saw drops on the spine. Either you end up with a tapered blade, as it knocks down the back at the toe, or you end up with a buckled blade, which can happen. A buckled blade seems like a stretch in most cases, but it has been pointed out to me that it could present such.

Now, look at the innovation/technique which Pete Taran came up with by using the slotted back. No amount of dropping will cause the blade to move, whatsoever. Modern epoxy will not fail, and has not been known to, unless it is exposed to heat. So, if the saw was in a fire, it would possible for the back/blade to separate or if enough heat, to completely burn up. But if a folded back saw was in a fire, I'm sure it wouldn't survive and could be melted as well.

Pete Taran did some testing by drilling holes through a back and blade, and used a come-along to try and pull the blade out of the back to see if it would fail. His experience was that the brass tore at the two spots it was drilled at, and the epoxy held fine. He believe the epoxy stands a small chance of failing, and I have to agree. I have never been able to pull one apart, but didn't do that extensive of testing on it.

That said, there are two schools of thought on this, and folded backs are functional and work fine, as do slotted backs. Whichever style you prefer, there is no reason it will not produce a perfectly functional tool. The best thing is to have an open mind, as there will most likely be folks in the other camp from the one you pick. That is what makes life go around...but look how modern saw makers are making their saws, there's something you can learn from that. At least some of the Wenzloff saws, the LN saws, the Adria saws, Medalian Toolworks, etc...there are still some saws using folded backs, like the LYNX, Garlick, PAX, Crown, Robert Lee, etc...and Gramercy uses folded backs, as does Eccentric Toolworks, the later two make quality saws.

[Joel Moskowitz]

If the tension on a folded back is correct there is no way to pull off that brass without considerable mechanical help. (ask folks who have built our kits how hard it is to pull off a back once installed) Most of the epoxied backed saws I have have failed over the years - mostly to hard use dropping etc. A good shock splits the joint.
However the real advantage of using a folded back is that the we make the back smaller, the brass thinner, and conseqently lighter. THe lighter the saw (if it has the right balance) the easier it is to control.

However if you are making a back from scratch folding brass without a very large proper brake and press is diffiduclt because annealing the brass during the bend lessens the tension on the finished back.

Alan,
I know obviously you disagree with me but I'm not really trying to win you over just show that there is a credible school of thought in the other direction too.

[Ray Gardiner]

Hi Joel, Alan,

I have been doing slit brass backs, but I wasn't aware that it was common practice to epoxy the blade in place on a slit back? You learn something new everyday.
I just close the gap in a vise (with wide cauls) to provide an interference fit.

Am I doing it all wrong?

I know Tim Hoff, does two piece brass backs that are epoxied to the blade and some think this provides a stiffer spine. That's a different question.

As far as folded backs go, Joel is correct, it's not that easy, and you need the right brass alloy 260 half hard, even then it's difficult (not impossible) without a good press. Slitting is easier.

So, my question, Why epoxy the blade on a slit brass backed saw, is there anything wrong with just closing the gap?

Regards
Ray

[george wilson]

Ray and Joel: All of the saws we made for Williamsburg have folded backs,because the saws we copied had folded backs. There is nothing wrong with closing the gap so the blade is mechanicaly gripped,Ray. It's the same thing as folding in the final result.

In spite of the reasons folded backs may fail,our saws have all been used hard,especially by the Wheelwrights,and House Carpenters. We never had a backsaw returned to the shop because the blade got loose from the back. I think it may be a function of how carefully the back was prepared to grip the blade. We made sure that each back gripped the blade good and tight,and seated them all the way into the back till they made contact with the bottom of the groove. We ground a little bevel along the top edge of the blades to help them enter the thinner gap better,without shearing metal from the gap as they went in.

On the other hand,I have seen other makes of saws where the blade has slipped. I got my favorite antique backsaw cheap with a wavy blade. I just jerked the blade straight. It wasn't kinked,just wavy.

There are people who glue guitar frets in,and us who press them in. It makes getting them out much easier if they are pressed in the original way. They can,and will wear down,and someday have to be replaced. Gluing them in is a new thing that a few luthiers do. Mechanical is better.

Blades are not frets,but if damaged,they are more easily replaced if pressed in.The old timers weren't stupid,and the technology they had was developed over a long period of time. Most everyone today are pikers compared to the output of saws and other tools that they made. plus,they were competing against other top notch makers in the golden age of hand tool use and production.

It does take some special tooling to fold backs. We made a long press in the shop to fold backs. They were started in a special V shaped brake we also made. Then,the backs,exactly shaped like this letter "V",were laid exactly in the long press so that the V back was horizontal,so the sides of the V would close equally,and the press squeezed each back till the requisite width of slit was obtained,one at a time,to fit the gauge of blade it was supposed to squeeze and hold. Backs had to be annealed as the bending progressed,3 or 4 times for the thickest Kenyon tenon saw backs,folded out of 3/16" sheet.

All this extra tooling,and annealing can be eliminated by milling a groove with a milling machine.

After bending,the beveled lower edge of the backs were hand ground. After fitting to the blades,the outsides of the back were ground parallel so they would fit into the handles without the cracking referred to previously. We never cracked handles fitting them to backs. I also squeezed the very tips of the backs shut before the grinding of the outside surfaces of their flanks and their rounded tops. Then,they were finally polished.

We could have made the backs without the press,by getting the V started,and hammering the backs down. Use of the press kept the backs' surfaces clean and even,eliminating excessive grinding later on. It is possible that the early makers could have had the backs cast in the shape of a V to begin with. Once brass is annealed,it is the same as cast. We don't know many of the secrets of the old makers,and had to reinvent ways of doing these jobs ourselves.




The most ideal shape of the backs in cross section was a very thin horse shoe,so that the bottom edge pinched the blade tightly.

As for trying to harden very thin 1095 sheet,that would be difficult. It is already the right temper,fortunately. 1095,1070,and 1050 are all water hardening steels.Actually,1095 is the same thing as W1. The water hardening steels are the most treacherous of all steels to harden.They can warp,crack,and do all manner of things. The thinner,the worse. If I HAD to harden a thin sheet,I'd make 2 plates of low carbon steel that would make a "holster" to fit around the saw blade.I'd bolt it together at frequent intervals to prevent the saw from warping inside the holster,or envelope. Then,I'd put it into my electric furnace,which is very deep,heat it up to 1450 degrees F.,and quench the whole thing in water. Then,back into the furnace for a few hours at 750 degrees F. Hopefully,the blade would have been contained so it wouldn't warp. Industrially,this steel is processed continuously in special furnaces and in special conditions,rolled into 1500 pound coils, at least the 12" wide sheet is,and shipped. Straight pieces are made by powerful stretching later on. That's also how flat aluminum plates are made flat. Millions of pounds of stretching after rolling. Some get milled flat.


It is also possible to hammer a spring temper into a soft,or annealed piece of high carbon steel. Anything long,like a buggy spring,is very difficult to heat evenly,unless you vave a special,long firebox like sword makers. Most blacksmiths could only get several inches hot at a time. They would weld a broken buggy spring,and hammer the spring where the heat of welding had softened it,until it was a spring again.

In London,by 1765,sheet spring steel was commercially made. It could have been made into a spring temper by rolling it. When a piece of steel is quenched,it is as if a hammer struck it all over its surface,packing the molecules tighter.

[Joel Moskowitz]

george,
do you have any evidence that backs were cast? Since at the time rolled brass stock was available, and one would have to significantly clean up the inner surface to grip the saw blade properly, casting makes no sense. Also annealing the brass sin't required if you have a big enough press and brake (we used to anneal but we don't now and it's easier and we better better, more consistent back tension but that's another story) So is there evidence to suggest backs were ever cast or is it just speculation?

[george wilson]

As I wrote,it is only speculation. We do not know many of the old ways. It was a way that the V could more easily been started. Whether or not it makes sense depends upon how much trouble the V was to form,vs.how much trouble the casting might have been to clean. And,why does the casting really need to be very smooth to grip the blade? Would it actually help the grip? We don't even know how the blacking of the numbers ,letters,and graduations on wooden folding rules was done. When we made folding rules,I had to figure out a way to do that without grinding lampblack into the wood. Can you suggest how I did that?

[Joel Moskowitz]

As I wrote,it is only speculation. We do not know many of the old ways. It was a way that the V could more easily been started. Whether or not it makes sense depends upon how much trouble the V was to form,vs.how much trouble the casting might have been to clean. And,why does the casting really need to be very smooth to grip the blade? Would it actually help the grip? We don't even know how the blacking of the numbers ,letters,and graduations on wooden folding rules was done. When we made folding rules,I had to figure out a way to do that without grinding lampblack into the wood. Can you suggest how I did that?

If there is no historical evidence to suggest a casting then the speculation is pointless. Evidence should come before theory not the other way around.

If you are interested in how graduations on folding rules were done historically I suggest reading Phil Stanley's excellent book "source book for Rule Collectors" (Astragal Press) he included a fair amount of manufacturing information both from Rabone and also from his own research. Since it's not my area of current interest I don't have too many other references available at my fingertips. I checked one more - a Lindsey publication (1921), which concurs with Stanley but it's later than the Rabone material.

[george wilson]

Cast backs. A passing thought I didn't use. Many people on this forum speculate. It makes it more interesting,oftentimes. Just look at the different speculations of what the best whetstone is.

In an age where effective methods of forming metal were limited,and abrasives were not what they are today,casting was a major process. With fine sand facings,I've seen castings come out of the Geddy foundry in Williamsburg that are so perfect,they look like lost wax castings. Can you be so expert that you can legitimately dismiss ideas out of hand? The only way to know would be to peel open a bunch of brass back 18th.C. backsaws. I don't think that's happening.

That said,you may have little idea how much time and effort we put into research on historic tool making. Sometimes it just isn't there. I do not know of another museum that has the resources,collections,and experienced craftsmen that Williamsburg has. We spent great amounts of time on the smallest details.

Top scientists are speculating how the dinosaurs went extinct,how big the universe is,and what goes on inside atoms. I suppose they should quit? I think they call it brainstorming. Speculations have led to further investigations that led to truth being discovered.The super collider was built on the speculation that we will find out more of what happened in the first micro second after the big bang. The Manhatten Project was first based on speculation that the Germans might beat us to the bomb,or that the bomb would work at all. Religon is all speculation. We can't know the truth till we die.

As for folding rules,that was a job I was paid to do,and did.I didn't ask about how to graduate rules,nor am I interested in making more.

I think we are allowed to speculate. Putting speculation into action is a last resort,though.

[Joel Moskowitz]

George,
I asked you if your speculation was based on evidence because in your position at CW might have shown you evidence of casting backs that I'm not aware of. But baring evidence, since turning a casting into something that looks like rolled brass, when all you save is one bend, is a lot more work (and you can easily get small telltail blow holes) I think we can say it didn't happen.
Musing on stuff that didn't happen is of course fine and dandy but before I go off and say to someone "george wilson thinks they might have cast the backs of saws" I want to know if you think it's a serious speculation or just something you never gave much thought to.

The reason I mentioned the easy to find published resources on rule marking techniques is that you said "We don't even know how the blacking of the numbers ,letters,and graduations on wooden folding rules was done." which since is easy to find information surprised me. Now maybe when you made the rules information was less available but I would expect CW to be on top of it and I'm wondering why you said that. A question: when you research something like this did you have to do all your own research or were there other research assistants whose job was more academic rather than practical who could help. You see that's my job. When we start working on designing a tool my job is the front line library work. Tim is the guy who takes my research, asks more questions, and then eventually designs the thing. Tim also comes to me with obscure questions and I have to figure out where to look it up. Once in awhile we hit on something interesting. Last week I asked tim his opinion of some saw research I was reading and it gave him a thought about possible filing geometry. So Friday and today he formally did the math and figured out some special filing angles. Tomorrow he is going to have our saw sharpener file up a saw this new way. I have no idea if the idea will be great, misleading, or be something we never ever mention again.

[george wilson]

Joel,I do not put forth the firm speculation that saw backs were cast,so,no to telling people I think that. Just a passing thought,nothing more.

I had research people,curator of tools,Jay Gaynor,my director and former curator of tools,visiting experts (including 1 rule expert) from other museums,technicians,other craftsmen,all kinds of research help.Plus,my own experience.

No one knew how the markings on rules were blackened. Jay tried it,and said he failed. The rule expert had a speculation I knew would not work.

I figured out how,at least I could manage to do it after some experiments.I still did not know how the originals were done.I had a batch of rules to get finished. When they were done,they were very identical to the unused original we were given to copy. I even made special number stamps like the original to cleanly cut,and not crush the wood,just as the original had.

It's not what I'd call a big deal,just took some thought: I french polished each rule until the grain was sealed. Then,I used a ball of cloth dipped in oil,then dipped in lampblack. The oil lubricated the lampblack enough that it did not turn the sealed surface of the rules gray. When the oil dried,it trapped the lampblack in the markings.

This was typical of what we,Jon and myself,had to do to get results,and make tools that looked like the originals. We stamped all tools clearly,because in some years of use,the repros would start looking like originals.

The job was about having the skill to do the work,but also the inventiveness to put together the lost information and make the tools possible to reproduce.

With the jigs I made,the warping issues with the boxwood (finally solved),the stamps I made,the folding joints and brass endcaps,and the hypnotic work of cutting all those graduations,I think the rules were the least return for the output in time and labor of any tools we made. Yet, the Holy Grail of having authentic tools for the Historic Area made it worthwhile to the museum. These rules were made by specialists who never did anything else,probably used cheap child labor,and had everything figured out. It was sometimes a task to emulate certain types of tools.

I even made over a hundred straight pins,with the little heads made from fine wire,wrapped around. But,those were for a WEALTHY private customer. Wealthy being the operative word.

When I can,I'll start posting pictures of some of the tools.

[george wilson]

P.S.,I'd like to know if your mentioned sources actually tell how markings were blackened in the 18th.C.,or is the info. more modern? At the time,no one I spoke to seemed to know.The old grads are very thin,like a razor cut. The grads were not printed on,nor rather "fat" like more recent rules.

[Joel Moskowitz]

P.S.,I'd like to know if your mentioned sources actually tell how markings were blackened in the 18th.C.,or is the info. more modern? At the time,no one I spoke to seemed to know.The old grads are very thin,like a razor cut. The grads were not printed on,nor rather "fat" like more recent rules.

Stanley reprints articles from 1910 which use the same method as you describe.

an account by David Goodson from 1963 of a company that still made rules by hand (a similar but not identical method to yours). complete with pictures

Stanley in his chapter on construction describes the same method as you do and says this was how it was done until 1900 - he references 2 articles from 1858 (TOMLINSON) and 1866 (rabone)

I might have some pre-1860 material which is relevant but I can't get to the book right now - it's an early book on drafting which might have stuff on ruler making. but then again it might not.

I'm intrigued enough right now to see if I can get to the public library and check out tomlinson. Rabone I don't have easy access too.

[Alan DuBoff]

If the tension on a folded back is correct there is no way to pull off that brass without considerable mechanical help.
Right, but they do get pushed down fairly easy when they drop.:rolleyes:

Most of the epoxied backed saws I have have failed over the years - mostly to hard use dropping etc. A good shock splits the joint. However the real advantage of using a folded back is that the we make the back smaller, the brass thinner, and conseqently lighter. THe lighter the saw (if it has the right balance) the easier it is to control.
Would be curious on how old the epoxied backs you have are, seems that this trend started with the IT saws, I have never seen an epoxied saw until the slotted backs came around. Was epoxy used before that? If so, how did they epoxy the folded back, it must have been hammered closed for the epoxy to contact??? :confused:

Alan,
I know obviously you disagree with me but I'm not really trying to win you over just show that there is a credible school of thought in the other direction too.
No, actually I don't consider you to be one of the folks I disagree with, and in fact I consider your saws to be quality saws, they just use a folded back. It is not as if I don't care for folded backs, I just feel that the modern slotted back has some advantages, and it is a much cleaner join for the back and plate.

I have been doing slit brass backs, but I wasn't aware that it was common practice to epoxy the blade in place on a slit back? You learn something new everyday.
I just close the gap in a vise (with wide cauls) to provide an interference fit.

Am I doing it all wrong?
I don't know if your doing something wrong or not. I have discussed this with Mike Wenzloff some time ago, maybe 3 years ago, and at that time he felt you could just crimp the back in a vise and that it would not come off. Mike uses epoxy on his, AFAIK, he son told me the other night they use loctite. Honestly I would think it safer not to crimp it at all and use epoxy, then if you ever need to replace the blade, you could heat up the back with a small torch and the back should come right off. Might be harder if you crimp it. Although to be fair, Mike Wenzloff has told me in the past that he removed a blade from a LN saw, and just about destroyed the plate to save the back. Then he put a new plate in it. But he had to destroy the plate to do so.

I know Tim Hoff, does two piece brass backs that are epoxied to the blade and some think this provides a stiffer spine. That's a different question.
Yes, that is a complete different style of fabricating the saws. Vlad Spehar made his saws that way. BTW, that reminds me, Vlad sent an email to Mike Wenzloff not long ago telling him how nice the saws were that he used which Mike had made. Mike does make some nice saws.

So, my question, Why epoxy the blade on a slit brass backed saw, is there anything wrong with just closing the gap?
Because that is how it has been done by many folks and it works. The epoxy ensures that the plate and back will not be separated or moved in any way, short of a fire. Drop it on the ground, let it hit directly on the spine, no problems. This is not so of a folded back.

While I have mentioned to people that I believe you could crimp the back and it would hold the blade secure (as Mike felt a couple years ago), I have never tried that. So your saws are the first to do that which I know of.

Would be interested how your back/plate withstand a come-along, and what pulls out at how much tension. Pete Taran has tested that out with epoxy and it appears that the epoxy holds well, and the material fails first.

[Joel Moskowitz]

Alan,
My epoxied backed saws are fairly new in the cosmic range of things - 10 years max. Some were dropped, none were ever overheated. They have all been disassembled at one time or another. The blades just pop out trivially. If you give the back a whack the joint fails. I don't remember if we ever took apart our wenzloff saw but if mike is using loctite that is certainly the way to go. Loctite beats epoxy any day of the week.

if you anneal a folded back it will work harden during the bend but you will not get the tension in the fold that you get when you fold a back without annealing. that's a much trickier operation and to do it we needed a brass bending expert to figure out how, with really big brakes. not something for the casual saw maker.

We fold backs because we think it makes a better saw and once we figured out how it's reasonably easy to do. Not everyone agrees with us. Both methods obviously work and I would agree that the final differences are arguable. A milled back is certainly less capital intensive than a folded back.

[Alan DuBoff]

Alan,
My epoxied backed saws are fairly new in the cosmic range of things - 10 years max. Some were dropped, none were ever overheated. They have all been disassembled at one time or another. The blades just pop out trivially. If you give the back a whack the joint fails. I don't remember if we ever took apart our wenzloff saw but if mike is using loctite that is certainly the way to go. Loctite beats epoxy any day of the week.
Would certainly like more info on the saws you have which failed, as it sounds like you have got them to fail pretty easy. This doesn't match Pete Taran's testing with a come-along.

if you anneal a folded back it will work harden during the bend but you will not get the tension in the fold that you get when you fold a back without annealing. that's a much trickier operation and to do it we needed a brass bending expert to figure out how, with really big brakes. not something for the casual saw maker
Yes, have done just that...here's a pic of a friend while we heated up the forge to 1300 to quench the 260 alloy in water (to anneal it).

First pic is testing for 1300 degrees, the second pic is the forge running at 1300. To anneal brass you take it to 1300, it will be an orange/red color, then quench in water. Yes, it does work harden as you work it.

[Ray Gardiner]

Hi Joel, George, Alan,

Interesting discussion, I think I have more questions than answers.

It's not clear to me what the advantages might be of having the saw plate fixed so firmly to the back that it can never be removed. I routinely remove backs from saws for re-furbishing and restoration, sometimes to fit a new blade, most (all) of them come off fairly easily. I just clamp the saw plate between two blocks of soft pine, and with another block carefully tap the back.

During normal usage there is zero load on the join between back and blade, it is only when dropped or something similar that it is likely to be dislodged. And we have all seen plenty of back saws with wavy blades and knocked down backs.. :) Pretty trivial to fix. (Alan will say it's just as easy to heat it up to remove the blade.)

I think we are splitting hairs with this question.

Another question, was Joel's comment regarding balance and designing for a lighter weight. I am intrigued, since my understanding is that a bit of extra weight is a good thing. The weight of the saw is supported by the wood. (now I'm confused).


Regards
Ray

[Alan DuBoff]

It's not clear to me what the advantages might be of having the saw plate fixed so firmly to the back that it can never be removed. I routinely remove backs from saws for re-furbishing and restoration, sometimes to fit a new blade, most (all) of them come off fairly easily. I just clamp the saw plate between two blocks of soft pine, and with another block carefully tap the back.
That is actually exactly the point Ray! :)

What if the back could not move from the plate? What would you need to do?

Yes, I agree with you that it is very easy, but my experience that most all saws that I tune up, need to have the back adjusted on the plate.

If we step back and look at the big picture, I have to ponder why you would need to do anything to a back that stays on the plate, in place, how it was assembled?

I'd like more proof that Joel separated an epoxied blade so easily without using heat. I'd like proof that good, quality epoxy was used. I'm gonna do some testing with a piece of brass. I'd like to see if I can get it off with a sledge and a cold chisel secured in a post vise I have. Certainly if Joel could get the backs of some epoxied saws so easily I should be able to do that with one that I epoxy also. I'll report back after I try this...

During normal usage there is zero load on the join between back and blade, it is only when dropped or something similar that it is likely to be dislodged.
I don't know about the load on the back/blade, I think there has to be some stress induced as there certainly is at the handle. Since the blade is bolted to the handle and the back is also mortised, I'm not sure how you could say there is zero load. :confused: I think there are probably a few variables in that, between the handle, plate, and back. The plate has the saw nuts to contend with, the back has the mortise.

And we have all seen plenty of back saws with wavy blades and knocked down backs.. :) Pretty trivial to fix. (Alan will say it's just as easy to heat it up to remove the blade.)
Actually I don't think I would say that, I would ask why you would need to remove the blade? Only if it was kinked and couldn't be fixed. But honestly, if a saw kinks, throw it away, make a new one. It's only a tool...unless there is a reason to save the specific back or plate, who cares? If the back and plate stay in place, why do you need to take it off? Do you want to clean out the slot?

BTW, that reminds me, you said "is there anything wrong with just closing the gap?", and I wanted to ask, what gap? I slot mine for the same size of the plate, if I use .018", I slot it for .018". Normally after I get the blue off and sand it, it is very close to .018". There ain't much to close in the way of a gap...Do you depend on that to stay put on the blade? With epoxy you can't remove it easily, I would be surprised if your back will hold over time, not to dis your saw, but it might be worth looking into for yourself.

Another question, was Joel's comment regarding balance and designing for a lighter weight. I am intrigued, since my understanding is that a bit of extra weight is a good thing. The weight of the saw is supported by the wood. (now I'm confused)
I don't buy into the weight either. In fact, my first saw using bronze parts was milled down to 3/16". I think it feels better balanced and it cuts as well, but the 1/4" thick one I just made feels ok. They both cut good, just that the lighter piece gives the saw a better balance.

Still, most of the "dovetail" saws from the old days are few and far between. There are not a lot of them that have survived in comparison, and most likely because it was a specialty saw and fewer were purchased. Although, they were cheaper as they were smaller, saws were fairly expensive tools in their day, where they are very reasonable in comparison to the value of the dollar, today, if you compare what people pay for planes and other modern tools.

Most of what is called a dovetail saw, is not really a dovetail saw. They were smaller, and lighter tools, so in regards to this type of saw for delicate work, few exist. I do have a couple that would fit the bill, but most of the saws I see are small tenon, or carcass saws. But in the end it's only a name, it's the type of saw and/or how it is designed. You really have crosscut and rip saws. There are really only 2 kinds...MikeW had some 2 1/4" dovetail saws at the LN event...but I call those small tenon or small carcass saws.

I subscribe to the balance also, and the 3/16" feels better balanced. I don't think the heavy weight adds, and in fact a saw that is heavy at the toe has a tendency to dive into the work, and or feel unbalanced. The heavier the back gets, the more it feels to me that the toe has weight. I don't want to need to compensate with my cut.

Keep in mind that I am primarily speaking here of joinery saws, saws that were intended to cut dovetails, mortises, tenons, lap, scarf, bridle, and other joinery. larger panel and hand saws are more for dimensioning and have a different set of criteria, one which I consider to be the taper grind. However, it was rare to see on backsaws, sans the Mechanics 77 that Disston offered (and that wasn't popular). I'm sure there are other cases of taper ground backsaws though, just that it is not common, AFAIK.

[Ray Gardiner]

Hi Alan,

I think we are talking about shades of grey here, the question is how firmly fixed does the back need to be attached to the blade. My observation is that it doesn't need to be attached so firmly that a come-along can't move it. As long as it doesn't dislodge during the course of normal use and occasional accidental drops then that sets a lower bound for how firm it needs to be. Anything a lot stronger than that is probably overkill. And if it stops you from doing maintenance on the saw, (like blade replacement) then, it will in the longer term, be detrimental to the longevity of the saw.

As to longevity, there are some 200 year old saws that seem to have survived just fine.

When I posed the question..
....is there anything wrong with just closing the gap?

I have generally use 20 thou plate, and a 20 thou slitting saw, the kerf seems pretty close to that. By closing the gap I mean closing up the 20 thou slit to maybe 15 thou or so, to provide an interference fit. Sorry if I didn't explain that clearly enough.

I don't think you need to prove how strong the epoxy bond is, it may be interesting, but I don't think it matters.

Regards
Ray

[Alan DuBoff]

I think we are talking about shades of grey here, the question is how firmly fixed does the back need to be attached to the blade. My observation is that it doesn't need to be attached so firmly that a come-along can't move it.
This is the point we are missing each other on. As long as the blade can not move in the back, there is not reason to need to "adjust" it.

I guess my point is that you will almost certainly NEED to adjust it in the future, as long as you the two pieces CAN be moved.

Your the first person I've heard of that constructs a slotted saw with the intention that it can be adjusted at a later date...it's an interesting concept, but if it doesn't move, there would be no need, IMO.

This doesn't make my way better or that your way is bad, just that there are two different schools of thought here, just as there are in comparing what I do against a traditionally folded back either. I really do rely on the epoxy for a bond. Comparison is ok, just that it will always be apples to oranges to some extent. There is way more than one way to skin this cat, some ways that probably haven't been thought up yet...

The other difference is that you slot your back about 3/4 of the width, where I slot mine less, about 1/3-1/2. Or, said another way that your slot is deeper. That might be different with no epoxy, since I use narrower stock as well (1/2" width on the joiner saws). I have much less blade in the back.

There are a number of differences in how you do your saws from me, just as there are in how Joel does his, or how another maker does theirs.

As my kids always say, "it's all good".:)

[george wilson]

Joel,we had to anneal our saw back,because the brass pulled apart if they were not. We left one last stage of final bending after the last anneal. This was enough re hardening of the brass that we had no cases of blades coming loose since 1992.Those saws were in hard use daily.

I think the failure of epoxy in backs must be related to either a shock cracking the glue line,or possible temperature variations cracking the glue line. Pulling at the blade does not apply that sudden shock that dropping the blade does,nor the difference in contraction,or expansion of 2 different metals that,under varying temperatures,might cause enough movement between the back and blade,to pop the bond. I also agree that Loctite is a better choice. A resinous grip is not so liable to failure as epoxy. There is a grade of loctite (660?) that my partner,and others actually use to cement double barrel shotgun barrels together !! Now,that is shock and vibration. Indianapolis race cars now rely on loctite instead of safety wires to keep nuts from vibrating off,and causing wrecks.

I still think mechanical squeezing is the best way for a back to hold a blade.