Jessica Pierce-LaRose
05-29-2012, 5:15 PM
I have an old Disston #4 - I think I mentioned it an earlier thread, as I still have a photo of it in my attachments . . .
233189
It proved very handy making the tenons on my workbench after I sharpened it rip, even though it's a little fine at 11 ppi. Eventually I switched to using my handsaws for all that work though - I've actually been using my hand and panel saws a lot more than backsaws lately, even on smallish work.
The thing is heavy as heck, and leaves a large kerf. It didn't occur to me to see how thick the plate was until the other day when I was seeing the saws Chris V. was selling the classifies. The plate is around .04" thick!
The odd shape of the plate at the handle end of the saw, (it doesn't end perpendicular to the tooth line) and the thick gauge of steel (which is pretty close to the 19 gauge steel the Disstonian Institute lists for Disston mitre box saws - my calipers aren't the most accurate and I didn't measure in more than one spot) make me think I've got a mitre box saw, but it's only 16 inches along the tooth line.
Seems like the shortest mitre box saw the Disstonian institute lists is an 18" version, listed in info from the 1929 catalog. My medallion matches what the D.I. lists as being from 1896-1917, however.
Even if I'm generous and measure along the top of the plate, the steel back of the saw is 17 1/4" inches long at most and I can only get to 18 inches if measure the plate well into the bit that's buried in the handle. Is that how these were measured?
I guess I've got my answer - this had to have been intended as a mitrebox saw, I just find it odd to be on the short side like this - it really shows no signs at all, at least to my untrained eye, of having been shortened, however.
I guess I've got myself some justification to start looking at other tenon saws, though!
233189
It proved very handy making the tenons on my workbench after I sharpened it rip, even though it's a little fine at 11 ppi. Eventually I switched to using my handsaws for all that work though - I've actually been using my hand and panel saws a lot more than backsaws lately, even on smallish work.
The thing is heavy as heck, and leaves a large kerf. It didn't occur to me to see how thick the plate was until the other day when I was seeing the saws Chris V. was selling the classifies. The plate is around .04" thick!
The odd shape of the plate at the handle end of the saw, (it doesn't end perpendicular to the tooth line) and the thick gauge of steel (which is pretty close to the 19 gauge steel the Disstonian Institute lists for Disston mitre box saws - my calipers aren't the most accurate and I didn't measure in more than one spot) make me think I've got a mitre box saw, but it's only 16 inches along the tooth line.
Seems like the shortest mitre box saw the Disstonian institute lists is an 18" version, listed in info from the 1929 catalog. My medallion matches what the D.I. lists as being from 1896-1917, however.
Even if I'm generous and measure along the top of the plate, the steel back of the saw is 17 1/4" inches long at most and I can only get to 18 inches if measure the plate well into the bit that's buried in the handle. Is that how these were measured?
I guess I've got my answer - this had to have been intended as a mitrebox saw, I just find it odd to be on the short side like this - it really shows no signs at all, at least to my untrained eye, of having been shortened, however.
I guess I've got myself some justification to start looking at other tenon saws, though!