Is a Disston D12 really superior?

[lowell holmes]

I recently went on a saw buying binge. I ended up with four new saws. I acquired a 8tpi panel saw with the notch. I also got a D7 10 tpi, a D8 10 tpi, and a D12 10 tpi.
They are all cross cut saws.

For the life of me, the D7 seems equal to the D12 except for maybe the wood in the handle.
The handle in the 8tpi panel saw is the superior handle with the lamb's tounge. It is most comfortable to hold and the handle is eased on the edges more.

Except for the D12, these saws were inexpensive. The D12 was a $70 saw.

My worn down D23 10tpi is a better cutting saw than any of them, but the recently acquired saws need sharpening and the set needs to be made smaller. They seem to rock in the kerf.

I look forward to messing with them.

[Paul Incognito]

Interesting reading:
http://www.disstonianinstitute.com/steel.html
I think the biggest difference between models is in the finish and the tensioning of the blade. I have 7's, 8's, a 9, 12's and 16's and I don't find any difference in cutting, just in the shape and the hang of the handle.
I look forward to reading other's experience with Disston's different models.
Paul

[Johnny Kleso]

A No.12 might be better than a D-12, is too new..

At Disstonian it says there is very little difference in any of the steels but folks sure pay extra for them..

[Jonathan McCullough]

I especially like this area of saw-ology because there really are subtle differences between individual saws. Different manufacturers, different models, different steel types, different eras, full width, ship's point, skew back, straight back. There are some I avoid because they are in the saw collector nirvanah stratosphere. I sometimes find No. 12s in the wild, but I never bid on them because they have attained a certain status. There are a lot of really good saws out there. If you like your No 7, use it! I happen to think they arguably have the most comfortable handles. If you're comparing a No. 7 versus a No. 12 from about the 1890 era, conditions being equal, the No. 12 is almost certainly going to be the better saw. Comparing two from the 1940s, the distinction isn't as pronounced. But the handles wouldn't be as nice. Different strokes. . . .

[lowell holmes]

The D7 and D12 are mid 20th century saws with nickel colored medallions. I have a D23 with brass sawnuts that cuts really well and always has.

I think the panel saw is a #7 dated 1896-1917. It is going to be a favorite. The old beech handle has cleaned up nicely. I sanded and bleached it. I don't know if I will stain it and put a finish on it.
I traced the handle on it and if anyone wants the pattern, I can probably get it scanned and make a pdf file. I made marks on 1/4" centers so it can be sized when printing. It is a 3 sawnut lambs tongue handle.

I might entertain making new handles for the D7 and D12, though I really don't know why. With the nickle colored saw nuts, they may not be as special. After I sharpen them, I'll know what I have.

[Don C Peterson]

I like my pre-1928 12's. Even though Disston made a big deal about using London Spring Steel in them, by all accounts they used the same steel in all their saws. I don't know if the treatment for the 12's was actually different from their other saws though...

The 12's have a superior handle IMO, and they also have a more aggressive taper grind. Mine all have a slightly thinner plate at the teeth than a 7 of the same period.

[lowell holmes]

Has this discussion ever been settled? Just curious.

[Pete Taran]

I can weigh in on this. I've taken Eric to task publicly and privately on the work he did on this. Eric is the guy who runs the "institute".

He took a single saw of each model and had it tested for hardness and composition as I recall. As most can imagine, taking a single saw from any population and imputing the measured characteristics of the entire population ever made is a ridiculous misapplication of statistics.

I've been collecting saws for a long time, and have probably 75 Disston #12 and D12s. I also have a Rockwell hardness tester that can measure both the Regular and Superficial scales. I'm here to tell you there is a difference! When I have enough measurements on my findings, I intend to publish them, until then, I can just tell you that pre 1928 #12s are much harder. I have one that measures at 56 C! That is harder than some cheap chisels. Further, the blades are ground much thinner. There is a big difference in how they perform and cut. Even the post 1928 blades are harder than their contemporary counterparts. London Spring Steel was mostly marketing hype and at the end of the day there was carbon and iron that made up the steel. A chemical analysis points to the same elements. How that was hardened and tempered is what Disston was crowing about. You can take high carbon steel and make it 40C or 60C depending on how it is heat treated. That is the difference in the #12, along with a thinner plate and a much nicer handle.

Properly filed and set, these saws perform like no other. It is not hype, but reality.

Regards,

Pete

[steven c newman]

Almost the same as "bevel up vs Bevel down" debates...

Crosscuts...I have a couple D8s, including a 10ppi, 20" Panel saw...I have a couple No. 7s and a D-7......
Rip cuts.....D-23 6ppi, Challenger K-6-1/2.....and The Farmer 7ppi.
I have a few by Atkins, including a Ships Saw. I like the way an Atkins fits in the hands.

Saws for my Mitre Boxes are all by Disston.

Have about 6 "orphan" handles right now,,,,that could use a good home..

[Pete Taran]

Steve,

As it relates to personal preference, I agree with you. As it relates to measurements and real data, you couldn't be more wrong. It's not like the bevel up vs bevel down debate. It's like the earth is round vs flat debate that amazingly is raging in some modern circles.

Just say, in God we Trust, all others bring data.

[lowell holmes]

Apparently, it is not settled.:)

I don't necessarily want it settled. I personally enjoy the conversation.

I rate my D-7 and D-12 to be equal. I love the 7, but am proud to have the 12.

[alan west]

I have an 8pt pre 1928 #12. It is the best saw I have ever owned. It cuts thru 4/4 hard maple with less effort than an 8pt 1930’s D23. However it took me a while to learn how to use it. This #12 requires less set and has a thinner blade which contributes to the easier sawing. That said, it took me a while to realize that a saw with less set is hard to steer back to straight as it has minimal “wiggle room” in the kerf. Rather than ever so carefully trying to start the cut straight every time, I added more set than I normally do. I have been looking for a #12 -5 ½ pt saw for a while now to put in the till next to the 8pt. I bought a 40’s to 50’s D-12 with a walnut handle and it is no comparison to the #12

[lowell holmes]

You may have to find another D7 or 12 and re-tooth it.

[lowell holmes]

I also have a 26 1/2" crosscut saw that is 8 tpi. It is a 4 saw nut handle. The medallion is silver color. It may not original, but it is tight in the medallion hole.
The saw has a nib. It is 8 tpi. It is a lambs tounge saw plate.

[lowell holmes]

I was calling my #12 a D12. It is in fact a 12. It really is a nice saw.

[Patrick Chase]

I've been collecting saws for a long time, and have probably 75 Disston #12 and D12s. I also have a Rockwell hardness tester that can measure both the Regular and Superficial scales. I'm here to tell you there is a difference! When I have enough measurements on my findings, I intend to publish them, until then, I can just tell you that pre 1928 #12s are much harder. I have one that measures at 56 C! That is harder than some cheap chisels.

What on Earth do you sharpen those things with? The only triangular file I own that could possibly be up to the job is a Vallorbe Valtitan (Rc72, $25 each). Are there other options besides that?

I have some solid WC flat files from my days of ski racing, and I have no doubt that one of those could cut Rc56 steel, but AFAIK they don't make triangular files like that.

[Mike Brady]

Johnny, good to see your post. I learned a ton about planes from you here and on your web page.

[steven c newman]

Been using a 6" Extra slim from Stanley for my saws. No issues. Even on a Nibbed No.7 or two...

[lowell holmes]

One thing not mentioned in this discussion is that if you re-tooth, you can change the tpi and also the rake of the teeth.
If you view Ron Herman's video on sharpening you will realize that is easy to make your saw exactly what you want it to be.

[Dan McKean]

"Properly filed and set, these saws perform like no other. It is not hype, but reality."

I just bought my first D-12. 1950's era, paid 5 bucks. Not knowing how to properly file and set the teeth myself, who/where might you recommend to do this for me? BTW, it cut a 2x4 in half pretty smartly!

[Ray Selinger]

I'm old enough to have used hand saws in construction .I never considered using handsaws as a pleasure until I used a D-12 at school . As apprentices, we were doing our practical.

[lowell holmes]

Obviously, I miss-spoke when I call it a lambs tounge saw plate, I meant lambs tounge handle.

[Patrick Chase]

I'm still curious to know what people are using to file an Rc56 saw plate?

Blue-hard 1095 is only Rc50 and already hard enough to separate the good files from the, well, not-so-good. Rc56 is in a range where only the very hardest chromed files like the Valtitans can go IMO. Most files that woodworkers use for saw sharpening aren't chromed at all AFAIK.

Is Rc56 typical for a D12 or was that a particularly exceptional example?

[Patrick Chase]

Obviously, I miss-spoke when I call it a lambs tounge saw plate, I meant lambs tounge handle.

The 16th Century called and wants its spelling back (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tounge).

[lowell holmes]

I don't know why I miss-spelled the word. I know that tongue is the proper spelling. :)

[george wilson]

I agree with Patrick. Except that the 1095 blue spring steel that we (and everyone else making boutique saws) always registered at 52 Rockwell on our Versitron hardness tester,one of the very best ever made. Even at that hardness,the saws would wear out a GOOD USA Nicholson saw file in one sharpening. How you're supposed to file a 56 RC. blade,I have no idea!!!!!!! 52 is about the hardness spring steel can BE without cracking if flexed. Sometimes we would break off a tooth setting teeth. Then,we had to re tooth the saw and start over. Our saws beat the heck out of ANY antique ones. They were the most highly prized tools we made.

[Kees Heiden]

Over on the Australian forum Rob Steeper caught some ridicule when he first published his hardness meassurement from old and new sawplates. He also thought some plates were up to 56 or so in hardness. After a while he learned to use his tester properly (it isn't as easy as it looks, especially not with thin material), and he started to meassure on the whole sawplate, not just some spot under the handle. In the tooth line all the saws then prooved to be of normal hardness, around 50 HRc.

I don't remember if he meassured a No 12 though. Probably not, those saws are a little too precious to cover all over with little divots.

[Pete Taran]

If the insinuation is I don't know how to use my tester, and the reading is wrong, it's not. I test in 3 spots, one near the cutting edge, one near the back and one near the center. The results are averaged. Further, I use the superficial scales for this thin metal which is required as the plate thickness is not sufficient to use the major scales. I also use a calibration block in the range of the resultant reading before testing to ensure the machine is not out of calibration.

56 C is indeed hard, but not nearly as hard as a file. I just tested a new production Nicholson mill file in the tang area close to the cutting teeth and it measured 68C. 68C will definitely cut 56C. I have not tried to file the saw I mention as it is in my collection, but I have filed saws which are very hard like this one. It takes several files to do the job. The first one gets trashed reshaping the teeth, the second gets worn out but is only deepening the gullet and just gets dull. Files get destroyed when a small spot of the file is rubbed over and over as is the case when getting out of whack teeth right.

Finally, people should not be surprised about handsaws with steel this hard. Disston also produced a line of saws called the Disston #340, #342 and the #344. I have all of these in my collection, but the #340 was handy so I just measured it. The Disston #340 was a handsaw for cutting metal. This particular model was made especially for structural iron workers use. The 342 was for cutting metal trim and steel mouldings and the #344 was cutting wood or metal, specifically soft metal placed over wood or iron nails or bolts imbedded in wood.

I calibrated the tester as I always do, using the N30 superficial scale. The result of the measurement was exactly 78 N30, which roughly translates to 61 on the Rockwell C Scale. That is as hard as most chisels, but yet was made to file. In flexing the blade, it doesn't seem any stiffer or prone to fracture than any other of their saws. If you accept the premise that using spring steel to cut iron was a pretty demanding application, then the measurement I took on the #12 of 56C is not at all surprising. Attached is a picture of the saw, major load removed to allow the reading. The superficial scales use the outer green ring.

365241

[Kees Heiden]

I wasn't insinuating. Just trying to report what I remembered from that other forum.

Do you get meassurements close to 50 on standard production saws?

[Pete Taran]

Please note that the 56C reported was for a single, outlier saw. Most are in the 48-52 range. The #12s are all on the higher end of the scale, however. I'm waiting for my confidence interval to become statistically small enough to conclude that they are not due to random variation. I'm getting close, but not there yet. Also, the testing spot is hardly noticeable. When using the superficial scales, you are only using 30 Kg of force. You can hardly see it. Getting a hardness tester and learning how to use it has been a very helpful tool in understanding old saw production methods.

[Kees Heiden]

It certainly looks like you are on to something!

And yes you can file 56 HRC. Once I tried to file sawnotches inthe edge of cheap hardware store chisel. I don't know it's exact hardness of course, but it is a usable chisel. It worked but it was damned hard on the file!


BTW, I wish I could find Rob Steepers messages about this on the Australian forum again. At the end he got some very usefull information. With a raster, covering the entire surface of sawplates he could see a pattern that looked remarkably like a hammer tensioning pattern.

[Patrick Chase]

I calibrated the tester as I always do, using the N30 superficial scale. The result of the measurement was exactly 74 N30, which roughly translates to 61 on the Rockwell C Scale. That is as hard as most chisels, but yet was made to file. In flexing the blade, it doesn't seem any stiffer or prone to fracture than any other of their saws. If you accept the premise that using spring steel to cut iron was a pretty demanding application, then the measurement I took on the #12 of 56C is not at all surprising. Attached is a picture of the saw, major load removed to allow the reading. The superficial scales use the outer green ring.

Where are you getting those superficial to C-scale conversions?

The normative tables in the ASTM E18 spec equate 74 N30 to an approximate hardness of Rc56, not Rc61 as you state. See table 9 in ASTM E18-03. Ditto for the tables here (http://www.engineersedge.com/hardness_conversion.htm) and here (http://www.carbidedepot.com/formulas-hardness.htm).

If your conversions were consistently off by that much then everything would make sense IMO.

[Pete Taran]

Typo Patrick. I wrote 74 but as you can see from the photo it is 78 which is 61 C (approx). I'll correct the original typo for posterity.

[Patrick Chase]

Typo Patrick. I wrote 74 but as you can see from the photo it is 78 which is 61 C (approx). I'll correct the original typo for posterity.

Thanks for the correction. I confess to having read the text and not looked at the picture (and also not extended enough benefit of the doubt). Sorry about that!

I'll defer to your greater experience on this one. As you know files have to have a certain amount of hardness "margin" to cut for any nontrivial length of time, and in my experience Rc56 (to say nothing of Rc61) is pretty iffy with anything but a very hard chromed file like a Valtitan. The fact that we work very small cross-sectional areas (single gullets or the tops of teeth) with saws undoubtedly helps to start the file cut cutting, so this isn't comparable to trying to file an Rc60-ish chisel or something like that.

It may be that my technique is less than ideal, or it may be that we have different notions of acceptable file life. It seems to me that it's also possible that the sawplates in question might be somewhat face-hardened for one reason or another (the N30 -> Rc conversions assume uniform hardness, obviously).

Thank you for a very educational thread. I really enjoy this stuff, as you may have noticed.

[Kees Heiden]

Face hardening certainly is a possibility. Those plates are hammered. But I also have not nearly enough experience and knowledge in this field to comment any further.

[Kees Heiden]

Finally, I found the thread on the Australina Woodworkforums. I don't know if I can add a link here, but when you open the Handmade saws forum, which is under Home made tools and jigs, and when you look for the thread about saw plate hardening, you'll find a huge discussion. It gets really interesting towards the end where Rob Streeper presents a bunch of data on a whole lot of saws. I don't know how statistically relevant his data set is, but it is more then I've ever seen somewhere else.

[Pete Taran]

Nice theory, but it doesn't hold up to Disston's own stated process by which they blank, harden, temper, tension, grind, polish and straighten in that order. If there was any work hardening, it would be removed in the grind and polish phases. Plus, I don't think there is a lot of hammering at the edges of the plate, and 2 of the 3 measurements I take are at the edges of the plate. There is no pattern I've seen where the edge values are lower than middle which would support the work hardening theory. And even if it were, I average the three values to get a composite reading for the saw, so it would be the same relative to all other values.

I don't know why some marvel that old time saw makers made some really hard steel. They obviously didn't have the kind of statistical control they did today. Some were harder than others, some softer than others. Such is the way of random variation present in all manufacturing processes. To the 56 C that I mentioned, remember that someone in the Disston plant had to file it the first time and deem it worthy of the Disston name. If it were too hard to file it would have never made it out of production. But yet it did which tells me it was within their accepted norms for that model. I don't think Disston had any fancy chrome plated files in 1900, so whatever they made in the plant is what they used.

[Pete Taran]

I browsed over the thread that Rob was working on. I'm not a member so I didn't look at his data, but it looks like his findings are consistent with mine. The premium saws as a group are harder and with less variation than other saws. The only thing that gives me pause is his use of a junky chinese tester and not a Wilson which in the analog world is the coin of the realm. Having said that, while his readings may not be accurate, they are probably precise.

[lowell holmes]

If I did not already have a 12. I would be on this in a heart beat. :)

[Kees Heiden]

Not everything from China is bad.

The discussion on woodworkforums is a bit of a train wreck, so it is hard to find what he did exactly. But he has more then one hardness tester and made quite an effort to calibrate them using hardness testblocks. He has a live long career in measurement technology, so I suppose he knows what he is doing.

Otherwise I agree. Outliers with very high hardness sure do exist. 56 HRc made me pause for a while, but sure, why not?

[lowell holmes]

My D-12 is restored with a new curly maple handle, new saw nuts,and cuts like a dream. It is 12 tpi.

[Charles Guest]

I recently went on a saw buying binge. I ended up with four new saws. I acquired a 8tpi panel saw with the notch. I also got a D7 10 tpi, a D8 10 tpi, and a D12 10 tpi.
They are all cross cut saws.

For the life of me, the D7 seems equal to the D12 except for maybe the wood in the handle.
The handle in the 8tpi panel saw is the superior handle with the lamb's tounge. It is most comfortable to hold and the handle is eased on the edges more.

Except for the D12, these saws were inexpensive. The D12 was a $70 saw.



My worn down D23 10tpi is a better cutting saw than any of them, but the recently acquired saws need sharpening and the set needs to be made smaller. They seem to rock in the kerf.

I look forward to messing with them.

I didn't notice much difference. Sold the 12 and made a few bucks on it. It was an old one that I bought from a very reputable expert, so it was in good fettle. It was a rip saw. Couldn't tell much difference between it and a 7 rip of the same length and tpi. Lot of hype with the 12s if you ask me.

[Kory Cassel]

It's all in the sharpening and geometry. If the D-12 has a thinner plate, less set, and the same geometry as the no 7, it should cut faster if they are both sharp. That is the only thing that makes one bit of difference. Fancy steel is marketing hype for hand saws IMO. The most logical contention is that the no 12 and D-12 need that fancy steel in order to be ground so thin. I don't personally buy it, but many just straight up fanatical saw guys do. If the 7 is sharpened better than the 12, it will cut better even with it's 'inferior' steel.

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

I know the reason why "many straight up fanatical saw guys do" think that there is a difference in the steel. It's because as fanatics, we collect, observe, measure, study and make informed decisions about what's real and what's not. Opinion and conjecture is just that, opinion and conjecture. You should come on board the reality train and leave arm chair observations behind. It's a fantastic journey!

Happy Sawing,

Pete

[lowell holmes]

The reason I have a saw vice, saw set, and a wallet of saw files is so I can experiment with and sharpen my hand saws.

It is nice to put a board on my saw bench, strike a cut line with a tri-square, and cut a board without having to get the "skill saw" out.

[Kory Cassel]

Wow, that's pretty ugly Pete, even for a guy who tags himself 'The Saw Troll'.

It's only to be expected that the fanatical devotee who has spent a great portion of his time and money on his particular belief would be passionate. I don't understand exactly how you could know who I am and personally attack me for my beliefs. This must be how victims of terrorism feel.

I got violated by The Saw Troll!:eek:

[steven c newman]

Wait in line....

That was tame for a change.....

[Kory Cassel]

What will he say when I tell him I prefer my D-8s?

[Mike Brady]

No, the Disston 12 is really superior.

[Kory Cassel]

The D-8s have such a better handle. Those unwieldy saws like the no 12 with their outmoded English style handles are no good. Henry Disston made a seminal breakthrough when he designed the D-8. They are better in EVERY respect than the over-hyped no 12.;)

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

I don't know how it was ugly. Didn't call you any names or insult you in any way, other than to point out that opinions are not worth much. Get your hands dirty and do some work and then come back with some facts instead of your beliefs and opinions. Is there anyone who can really refute that premise? That data and study is more valuable than opinions?

I could flip the tables on you. You called me a fanatic. While most take that as a compliment, some could be offended. Gee, that was really ugly Kory, I don't understand exactly how you could know who I am and personally attack me for my beliefs. This must be how victims of terrorism feel.

I got violated by Kory Cassel! :eek:





Wow, that's pretty ugly Pete, even for a guy who tags himself 'The Saw Troll'.

It's only to be expected that the fanatical devotee who has spent a great portion of his time and money on his particular belief would be passionate. I don't understand exactly how you could know who I am and personally attack me for my beliefs. This must be how victims of terrorism feel.

I got violated by The Saw Troll!:eek:

[lowell holmes]

I made a new curly maple handle for my D-12, The saw is sharp and fun to use.
I have 13 Disston hand saws, mostly D-7s and D-8s. There is nothing unwieldy
about them. :rolleyes:

[steven c newman]

I kind of prefer the No. 4 saws...
397601
From a 14" up to one of these...
397602
And..both are indeed Disston No. 4s

[Eric Rathhaus]

I have a chance to buy a used Disston 4 that is 30" by 6 for $15. Some discoloration and small place with pitting. What do you think? Is it too big for the Stanley miter box No. 150?

[Pete Taran]

I think it would be. That box came with a 4" saw.

[Kory Cassel]

No, no, no Pete. You identified yourself as a fanatic in your first salvo, I didn't label you. "as fanatics, we collect, observe, measure"

[Kory Cassel]

I'd buy it if it was a Phila medallion or older. Restore it real nice and it could be worth much more.

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

The first lesson of identity politics is it didn't matter how you meant it, it was how it was received. I can't believe this has to be pointed out to you. <sigh> :confused:

[Kory Cassel]

Identity politics nothing, you proudly called yourself a fanatic in your unprovoked personal attack which had nothing substantive to offer to the discussion.

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

Forgive me, but I think you are confusing our posts. If you read back to the beginning, you will see we had a nice reasoned discussion going on about saw hardness complete with real data and real observations. Then you parachute in with your opinions, unqualified, stated as fact. Then you get upset when I poke some fun at you and point this out, and now you are offended? Is there a name for the private fantasy land that you call home? I'd love to pay it a visit sometime.

But, you have doubled the number of posts here at the Creek since participating in this thread, so that is at least something.

Happy Sawing, with a substandard #12 or the coin of the realm D8, whichever you prefer!

[Kory Cassel]

Wrong again, I stated an opinion. You attacked. I was addressing the thread. You were addressing me. You don't know who I am or what information I am privy to. I said something that challenged your own personally held beliefs, you got ugly. And no, I'm not offended. I'm just pulling your leg.

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

Well that's a relief! Please, in the future, do share your secret knowledge so we can all be enriched by it. To be clear, my "beliefs" as you call it, are fact based. As demonstrated in the thread. That was and is my point.

[Kory Cassel]

Yeah I love my D-8s. I was talking about the design change made by moving the grip closer to the tooth line. It makes my 30" D-8 rip easier to re-position than my far lighter 24" hardware store saw with its old style handle. People who tout the old style handles tend to talk about 'hang'. Like having the saw feel heavy and uncomfortable to lift with one hand is somehow a benefit.

[Kory Cassel]

Pete,

I'm a welder. I know marketing hyperbole about steel when I see it. It is hard to explain, but it's just very clear to see from my perspective. There is no such thing as magic steel. If any given no 12 is a superior saw, it is because of the craftsmanship of its construction and the condition of its sharpening. If you believe the 150 year old marketing copy and think there are special intangible, unmeasurable ingredients in a no 12 saw plate that created super steel for a super saw, then I will challenge that belief. It's like an audiophile trying to convince an electrician that his $1000/ft speaker cable is made from some special type of copper that sounds better.

Repeat after me: There is no such thing as magic steel!

[lowell holmes]

Like I said. I have a custom handle and the saw is the favorite of all my Disston saws.
I got it with a broken handle and had to make one. I have made handles for a D-7 as well.
When you take junker saws, re-tooth then and make new handles, you have a new saw.
If you don't like the handle on a saw, design and make a new one. I started making handles
when I bought a kit from Ron Bontz.

[Kory Cassel]

So it is a D-12 and not a no 12? The D-8 has that cutaway at the handle end of the saw plate that gets your grip in there closer than is possible with the old no 12s. If your saw is a D-12, I think it could possibly be either design. I'd have to check Disstonian about that. Sounds cool, can you post a pic?

[lowell holmes]

397614

Will this do? If you make your own grip, you can make it to fit you. The saw in the picture has a curly maple handle.

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

Again, read the thread. No one as talking about magic steel, except for you apparently. I heartily contend that the steel that the Disston #12 is made of has carbon and iron in it, just like the blades they made for the D8. I'll also agree that the craftsmanship is superior on the #12.

The main difference, and the point I made from the beginning, is that the way Disston tempered the blade on the #12 has EVERYTHING to do with what makes it such a great saw. The hardness figures don't lie. They are harder. Since the blade is harder, the steel can be thinner. Because the steel is thinner, it runs more easily because less wood is being removed. Just as you would not use a stick welder to weld stainless, Disston didn't apply less than the absolute highest hardness to their best saw because they had to for the thinner gauge they ground it to.

Repeat after me, you can temper the same steel differently, get different a different hardness, and use it differently. That's not hype, that's reality.

[Kory Cassel]

Please excuse the awful picture, but here is my rip -saw. I don't think the let-in grip moved very much compared to the old handles, but combined with the clipped point these are very easy to handle. I can't tell from your pic if your saw is this style, it looks like it.

[Stewie Simpson]

Without taking sides with Pete or Kory, the following information is provided within the Disstonion Institute site; http://www.disstonianinstitute.com/12page.html

Stewie;




What made the No. 12 saw more expensive and higher in quality was the work that went into it. The blade was subjected to more hammer work than lesser-quality saws to give tension to the steel. The controlled introduction of internal stresses into the cold steel through hammering and subsequent tempering, resulting in a "tensioned" saw blade, creates a blade that is less likely to wander or vibrate unnecessarily in use. An added result of this tensioning is a blade that has a characteristic ringing or "singing" sound when tapped. This ca. 1880 28" ripsaw is a baritone.
http://www.disstonianinstitute.com/12page/12riphb.jpg


http://www.disstonianinstitute.com/12page/12ripa.jpg




http://www.disstonianinstitute.com/12page/no12h4.jpg
Another feature of the No. 12 handsaw is the extra taper in the blade. In order to reduce the amount of set required on the teeth, the No. 12 was ground thinner at the back than other models. Disston claimed the steel was harder in the No. 12 saw, which would enable the saw plate to be ground thinner while still remaining stiff enough stand up to mild abuse. After grinding and hammering, the blade was polished to almost a mirror finish.


'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ''''''''''''''''''



http://www.disstonianinstitute.com/12page/d112.jpg

http://www.disstonianinstitute.com/12page/Novdi122.jpg

In 1928 all the saws in the Disston handsaw line were redesigned. One small change was the renaming of saws from the "No." designation to "D". For example, the No. 12 was changed to D-12. Disston announced other changes included narrower blades, harder steel, more taper in the blade, and different finish on the handle. Disston changed the finish from varnish to lacquer.
After 1928 the handles had a closed top that covered the top of the blade, instead of the slit that was visible on the top of earlier saw handles. The blind slit in the new handles was matched in shape to the blade, resulting in a handle that was less likely to loosen from the saw. This feature was introduced in 1875 with the D-8 and Acme 120 saws.
Unlike the earlier saws, the D-12 was not drastically different from other saws in the line, such as the D-8 and D-23. The quality and finish of the D-12 is comparable to that of those other saws. The saw nuts of the D-12 were nickel-plated brass, and the blade featured a high polish not given to the D-8.





http://www.disstonianinstitute.com/12page/d12h4.jpg

[lowell holmes]

Make a drawing of what you want to build and go for it. If you have a saw that has an uncomfortable fit, modify it or make a new one.
It is a fun trip. Sketch a handle based on one you like and go from there.

[Kory Cassel]

Pete,

There were several comments along the course of the thread questioning the validity of the "Extra Refined London" marketing blabs Disston put into advertising their premium saws. I think if you had read what I wrote in that first post instead of going off on a rant, you would find that we don't actually disagree. You can temper the same steel differently, ABSOLUTELY YOU CAN. I was answering the THREADS question of why lowell's 7 performed as well or better than his no 12. Not attacking your hardness testing research or even that the no 12 is an intrinsically better tool. Never said that the no 12 was not harder, or thinner, or had any sort inferior craftsmanship compared to a no 7. Just saying super magic steel won't make a saw perform well if its not sharp, so a given no 7 can easily outperform a no 12.

[Kory Cassel]

But that's my point, this type handle won't fit a no 12. The saw plate is in the way, that's why I don't care for the older style handles. Did your saw have the cutaway in the plate? It's a semicircular shaped deal. The old ones would just be clipped straight across.

[Kory Cassel]

Oh yeah, thanks Stewie. We've both read that. I think that Pete has commented that he disagrees with some of the Disstonian findings because the sample size was too small. Makes sense to me that the true value of the no 12 is in the way it was crafted, and not any special steel. Part of what I said in the first place, but I'm sure Pete will find something else wrong with me that makes him angry.

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

I want to make sure I got this right, so bear with me, because I think you are on to something here. You are saying if a saw isn't sharp, it won't cut very well, is that right?

If that is true, I agree 100% with your contention.

Pete






Just saying super magic steel won't make a saw perform well if its not sharp, so a given no 7 can easily outperform a no 12.

[Kory Cassel]

If you'd read my original post, that was the point. The no 12s super steel won't make up for it being dull.

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

Not angry at all. You seem to be imputing feelings that aren't there. I never said that the steel was special, you did. I just said that it was harder, and by making it harder, the saw could be made differently. Third time I'm pointing this out and likely the third time you will ignore it in your gushing love affair with the D8. The D8 is a great saw, and I own 100s of them. The #12 is better, in every respect. Perhaps this is a Chevy / Ford type debate?

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

That's a very keen observation. I thank you for that.

All the best,

Pete


If you'd read my original post, that was the point. The no 12s super steel won't make up for it being dull.

[Kory Cassel]

Maybe it is a style preference, I've used several but don't own a no 12. I only have 3 full size handsaws (user not collector). I just like being able to lift my rip-saw into position without feeling strain in my wrist. Are you the proprietor of some kind of hand tool museum?

[Pete Taran]

Nah,

I'm just a chucklehead who has collected saws since 1991, and has made a few along the way.

Pete


Maybe it is a style preference, I've used several but don't own a no 12. I only have 3 full size handsaws (user not collector). I just like being able to lift my rip-saw into position without feeling strain in my wrist. Are you the proprietor of some kind of hand tool museum?

[Kory Cassel]

I haven't done much cold work. Some forging, but I've never tried hammering the hardened steel. What's that like? Im not totally clear about what is going on with the tensioning. Are you trying to stretch the spine or the tooth line?

[Jason Lester]

I think Pete's being very modest here. Maybe do a Google search for his name and you'll see why he has such strong opinions on saws.

[lowell holmes]

It will be your saw. Take a junker and play with it. I did and have a gorgeous saw.
There is no reason you shouldn't alter a saw plate to suit you.

[Pete Taran]

Kory,

It was not a one size fits all situation. Each blank had different characteristics and had to be hammered differently. Attached is an excerpt from Disston's own manual on saws, dated 1914. It describes the process they used after taper grinding, but before final glazing.

397626


I haven't done much cold work. Some forging, but I've never tried hammering the hardened steel. What's that like? Im not totally clear about what is going on with the tensioning. Are you trying to stretch the spine or the tooth line?

[Kory Cassel]

lowell,

I hear you and I respect your right to do what you like with your own property, but I also try to consider the collector's sensibilities when I do my restorations. While I'm not afraid to remove some 'patina' to restore a tool to full function, I keep my stuff as original as possible. Most of my tools were assuredly in less than Fine condition when I bought them, but it would have to be a pretty much ruined no 12 before I would feel comfortable cutting up the saw plate. And then what would be the point?

[Kory Cassel]

Fast or loose huh? I'm still a little confused but it looks like they were hammering down the center if the saw was stiff, and down the spine if it was floppy. Is that right?

[Pete Taran]

I don't think so. Hammering stretches the steel. So it appears they hammered it on the edge if the center was not properly tensioned to impart some tension in the edge. If the edge was tight but not the center, they would hammer the center to stretch it. By edge they mean near the cutting edge, not obviously hammering on the .040" edge vertically. I wonder if the modern makers go through this trouble, or just cut the plate from coil and call it good. I'm guessing not many people understand the arts of tensioning today.

[Kory Cassel]

I would be shocked to find any finely made hand tensioned hand saw for less than the price of 10 good restorable antiques. The price of the skilled hand labor would be too high.

[Tom Levy]

I just made my first handsaw purchases from eBay, any advice on tuning them?

Never done any saw sharpening before, but excited to try. Got a D8 8pt rip, D23 8pt xcut and #12 8pt xcut ($5, $5, $45). All in decent shape it appears, no rust or missing teeth and all handles seem solid.

[lowell holmes]

I am a user, not a collector. I do not intend to sell my saws. They will be inherited by my heirs.
I would not butcher a pristine saw, but I will recondition a rust bucket saw. My D-12 was that.
It is now a desirable saw that will not be sold.

[Tony Zaffuto]

I don't think so. Hammering stretches the steel. So it appears they hammered it on the edge if the center was not properly tensioned to impart some tension in the edge. If the edge was tight but not the center, they would hammer the center to stretch it. By edge they mean near the cutting edge, not obviously hammering on the .040" edge vertically. I wonder if the modern makers go through this trouble, or just cut the plate from coil and call it good. I'm guessing not many people understand the arts of tensioning today.

I'm reading this thread with much interest, and of the opinion, that the #12 and #16 were some of the finest saws ever made. Further, owning a number of non-spined back saws by modern makers, the feel is not the same. Though the look is prettier, the feel is not as responsive. As I mentioned, my comments are only about saws without a spine

[Kory Cassel]

No rust or damage to the handles at those prices? Deal of the century. I don't like my Disston no 5 vice for the full size handsaws, if you don't already have a saw sharpening vise I recommend buying or making a larger one for those saws.