resawing with a rip saw

[Roger Rettenmeier]

I needed some 1/2 in panels to build cabinets . I initially made about 6 cabinets, and used my bandsaw mill to mill the 1/2 in stock with some over run. The same person then had me build another, and now another cabinet to match. I was out of 1/2 in stock, so am resawing out of 4/4. I do not own a bandsaw, so I re sawed using a 6 point rip saw. I think Jim K. mentioned using a 6 point Disston for some of his rips for panels. I did a couple of 6 in. x 20 in. long rips, and my question is about technique. This is how I did them... 304177 I sawed from one corner to the other keeping the saw carefully centered on my scribe line. The saw was loading up in 6 inches of rip cut. It was cutting ok in about 3 or 4 inches of wood 304179. I flipped the board over and sawed to the center of the board from each side,repeatedly 304180 .

I have not tried this before, so I am wondering where I can improve. Comments?

[David Weaver]

Your method is a good one and that's the way I've done it. The results look good, too.

There was a lot of static on here about plowing a groove in both sides so that you can just saw without switching the piece, but I haven't done that.

If you want to cut a wider cut and still get good bite, you'll need to increase rake or lower tooth count (you can get too aggressive with rake, though).

I've never resawn pine, only cherry, walnut and beech and don't know if that has anything to do with the feel of the saw loading (and if it was in fact loading, or if it was the feeling of the saw teeth not being able to get a good bite).

The following is my opinion from resawing the harder woods, and that is that it is harder to be accurate when you get at a shallower angle (e.g., leaning the board further forward), but the saw cuts faster (especially with aggressive rake) and the cut effort feels lower. It's not a fast process, but it's enjoyable and physically satisfying if you know you need exercise (I do).

[Jim Koepke]

The saw was loading up in 6 inches of rip cut.

It might help to lift the saw in the back stroke to help clear the gullets.

Another thought is to make full use of the saw plate. a few short strokes using just the toe of the saw can make it difficult for the heel of a taper ground saw to get in the cut without binding.

Pine and other woods will often close on a cut. Maybe someone needs to invent a riving knife to mount on a hand saw. :confused:

jtk

[David Weaver]

It's useful to keep shims for resawing, even if they are the very cheap type of shims that are intended for cabinets and toilets (the ones that are like a buck or two at a borg).

[paul cottingham]

I cheat. I cut a groove around the outside of the board with a thin kerf ripsaw blade on my tablesaw. I then cut them apart with my 4pt ripsaw. I find starting the saw, and tracking in the cut much easier this way. I waste more thickness in the kerf, but it works for me.

[Jim Matthews]

You should retire, now.

You've succeeded, on your first try.
I can't do this better, and I've had plenty of practice.

[Reinis Kanders]

I sometimes swipe a saw with 3-1 oil rag can ala Paul Sellers, quicker than parafin bar and does help when saw binds.
https://paulsellers.com/2011/10/recycling-4oz-bean-or-tomato-tins/

[Mark AJ Allen]

I cheat. I cut a groove around the outside of the board with a thin kerf ripsaw blade on my tablesaw. I then cut them apart with my 4pt ripsaw. I find starting the saw, and tracking in the cut much easier this way. I waste more thickness in the kerf, but it works for me.

I do alot of resawing by hand so I made some specialty items. I cheat too. A special plane with a sawplate to make the same kerf you're describing you making with the table saw. Of course, it has a fancy name "kerfing saw".

304184304185

It still needs some finishing but it's functional. A much simpler version can be made if a fixed width is desired. Once the kerf is made around the perimeter, I come in with this:

304186

Rip saw works just as well as long as the kerf is established. Lots of good recommendations in this thread; using wedges, establishing the kerf, keeping as much of the plate in the cut as possible. I could also recommend waxing your sawplate as it helps with friction.

[Roger Rettenmeier]

Thanks for the input. I checked my filing notes on that saw, David. It is filed with 5 degrees of rake, 4 fleam. I have a D 8 rip saw (also a 6 point) without a handle that I could file differently, maybe take the rake all the way to 0 degrees. That panel was Doug Fir, I also do some work with walnut and cherry oak and maple so I could use a different filing configuration anyway.

Mark, I like the kerfing saw. That would be a good use for used up saw plates.

Paul, I read on another thread something about a "Neander Decoder Ring". Would the use of a tablesaw be grounds for confiscation?

[paul cottingham]

Paul, I read on another thread something about a "Neander Decoder Ring". Would the use of a tablesaw be grounds for confiscation?

Sadly, yes. So I recant my earlier statement. :-)

[David Weaver]

Thanks for the input. I checked my filing notes on that saw, David. It is filed with 5 degrees of rake, 4 fleam. I have a D 8 rip saw (also a 6 point) without a handle that I could file differently, maybe take the rake all the way to 0 degrees. That panel was Doug Fir, I also do some work with walnut and cherry oak and maple so I could use a different filing configuration anyway.

Mark, I like the kerfing saw. That would be a good use for used up saw plates.

Paul, I read on another thread something about a "Neander Decoder Ring". Would the use of a tablesaw be grounds for confiscation?

0 would probably be OK, but I have to admit I haven't resawn anything with more than 5 tpi. I have a 4 1/2 saw that's ultra aggressive and I also have to admit that it's a bit ungainly even in resawing because it's so aggressive - that would be in the woods I mentioned. I just don't know how that would translate to softwoods.

It costs little to file your saw with zero rake and give it a try, though. There's a very large difference in the feel of a saw with 5 degrees vs. one with 0 degrees. No fleam, too.

[Mike Allen1010]

I do alot of resawing by hand so I made some specialty items. I cheat too. A special plane with a sawplate to make the same kerf you're describing you making with the table saw. Of course, it has a fancy name "kerfing saw".

304184304185

It still needs some finishing but it's functional. A much simpler version can be made if a fixed width is desired. Once the kerf is made around the perimeter, I come in with this:

304186

Rip saw works just as well as long as the kerf is established. Lots of good recommendations in this thread; using wedges, establishing the kerf, keeping as much of the plate in the cut as possible. I could also recommend waxing your sawplate as it helps with friction.

Very cool Mark . You've clearly done this before. I'm old and fat so hand resawing is not my favorite thing, but the Kerf plane is the way I would go if I could manage the work. Thanks for sharing the pics.

Cheers, Mike

[Bill Rhodus]

I use a fair amount of pine for secondary wood and have done a fair amount of resawing and will offer the following. I believe the 0 rake will work fine in your application but keep in mind that it will be a bear to use for hardwoods. Also, if you get a coarser saw, the 0 rake will be to aggresive. My attitude is much like David's, in that I view the work as benificial exercise and I need it. Unless there is a lot of resawing to be done and then that cap goes out the window and I use the bandsaw.

[Tony Shea]

I used to resaw a lot, prior to owning a bandsaw. I still redraw smaller pieces just because I enjoy doing it from time to time. Most of my resawing has been in hardwood, as hard as Honduran Ridgewood. I have two 5 point Rosales, one with 0degree rake and one with 5degree rake. The only time I use the 5 degree is on the really hard woods like rosewood. Maple, cherry, oak, etc all gets done with my 0 degree rake saw. I can typically redraw relatively accurate and fast if I can get in the groove. I find it to be fun work and great practise for cutting tenons and the like.

[Brian Holcombe]

I'm resawing about 10' of 10" wide walnut right now.....the fun wears off pretty quickly. My panel saw is general purpose, since I don't resawing very often, however wondering if setting it to a zero rake has a downside for other procedures.

it has a 10 degree rake at the moment, and certainly is slow going.

[Jim Koepke]

wondering if setting it to a zero rake has a downside for other procedures.

Everything is a balancing act.

A faster cutting saw tends to leave a bit more roughness around the cut.

Can't speak for others, but this is the reason I still look at saws when out on a rust hunt. Of course after you have so many you only want to take the pretty ones home.

jtk

[Brian Holcombe]

That's be fine for me, as my panel saw is mostly dedicated to rough cuts.

[Roger Rettenmeier]

After this go, I am sharing that opinion. After three of these 20 inch panels, the time factor becomes a problem. If I had to make multiple cabinets, I would stick to the band saw. There is just one cabinet for this job, and I am going as much Neander on it as I can with the tools available. I can use the practice. I will ultimately likely be some sort of hybrid woodworker..

[David Weaver]

That's be fine for me, as my panel saw is mostly dedicated to rough cuts.

As jim said, hard on the back side of a cut (the blowout can be spectacular, but you'll already be getting some with a 5 degree rake saw). The aggressiveness can be so strong that it's unpleasant and physically tiring because the teeth grab, even moderately during the cut.

I prefer fewer teeth in a resawing saw as the first option, before going to zero rake.

[Tom M King]

0 will work just fine, with Pine like that. It doesn't work so good on really tight grained Pine though. You just can't have any reluctance at all, including the first starting strokes.

Said the old carpenter to the young carpenter complaining of it being hard on his back, "You ain't old enough to Have a back."

I showed one of my best friends how a shooting board works last week. He's a fairly strong guy, still handles hay, and works on his own cars, and equipment, and certainly smart enough having won the Nobel Prize in Phyics. The plane was as sharp as possible, and the wood was 3/8x2" Yellow Pine. He had a hard time at first, because he tried to ease the plane into the wood, and then push. He quickly got the hang of it, but that's the kind of reluctance I'm talking about that doesn't work with a strong rip saw.

[Thomas Schneider]

I just went through this with some 8" x 8/4 x 6' cherry I have. This was my first attempt at resawing by hand. I'm not too sure what rake my Disston #7 is but it's 5 1/2 PPI. To be honest, I thought it would be a little easier to do then it was, took a few hours for me to get it done. Don't let anyone tell you "hand tool woodworking doesn't make dust"! 304302304303
I flipped the board once I was about 75% done and the saw kerfs didn't exactly meet up and that's with plowing a 1/8 groove around the whole board, but there was enough width left to
plane it out.

304312

[Bill Rhodus]

I bought a 3 tph blade from Blackburn Tool and made a frame saw just to resawing pine for secondary wood. This saw has given me greater perspective as to the relationship of tph, tooth pitch, board width, and species. Oh, and the current condition of my back.

[Roger Rettenmeier]

That looks a LOT like work, nice panels, though As far as dust goes, at least this method does not produce as much fine, airborne dust that is hazardous to your lungs.

[Roger Rettenmeier]

How much difference is there between a frame saw, and a rip saw in resawing a wide panel? I am sure there are plenty of Neanders that have used both, and have a good frame of reference.
For myself, I did three 20 in panels, I have several other rip saws with different pitch that I should have compared to each other

[Tony Shea]

How much difference is there between a frame saw, and a rip saw in resawing a wide panel? I am sure there are plenty of Neanders that have used both, and have a good frame of reference.
For myself, I did three 20 in panels, I have several other rip saws with different pitch that I should have compared to each other

I personally much prefer a standard saw to a frame saw. I made a frame saw a while back with a 4tpi blade. This thing really buzzed through the stock but was a bit awkward to use. I never really enjoyed it as much as a standard 5tpi saw with 0deg rake.

To be honest Thomas I think you should've been able to rip that board you have pictured up there in under an hour. It may say something about how sharp your teeth were. And eventually you'll get so you don't fall off track with such a step in the board when your done. I actually attack the board from both sides in order to follow the line on both sides. A saw can have a tendency to drift on the backside if you don't pay attention.

[Winton Applegate]

I haven't resawn anything with more than 5 tpi. I have a 4 1/2 saw that's ultra aggressive
Yep
I vote for few teeth pi. I couldn't find anything coarse enough for my 10 inch wide planks etc. so I made my hand resaw using a length of new bandsaw blade.

I had to take some rake off the points. It just grabbed too aggressively for hand sawing without modifying the teeth.

I did a bunch of resawing by hand . . . annnnnnnnnd . . . .
bought a nice band saw. I'm not ashamed. :o

Love my Laguna. Love, love LOVE :rolleyes:

The grooving plane is soooo cool ! Almost makes me want to go back to doing it by hand. Almost.
I would like to make one for smaller stuff which is totally doable and desirable to do by hand.

It was just the eight footers that were way wide that was really just too much with out another person and a pit to saw in.

[Brian Holcombe]

Wew, finished the cut between other tasks. Planks this wide for 10' are hellish...the advice is appreciated none the less I think I will get some stuff together so I am well prepped for the occasional resaw.

[Bill Rhodus]

As Tony said in his post, a frame saw really feels awkward when you are used to a hand saw. I do believe if you don't want a bandsaw and intend to resawing a significant amount of lumber, the frame saw has advantages over a hand saw. Couple of things to keep in mind if you decide to make a frame saw; buy a 3" or 4" wide saw blade that you can sharpen rather than using a bandsaw blade. Most bandsaw blades have induction hardened teeth that you cannot file. If the bandsaw blade is wide enough you can grind away the hardened teeth and start over but it is a lot of work. I think Blackburn charged me a little more than $100 for a 4"×48" blade. The wider blade is also easier to keep on track as you are sawing long lines and you can alter the pitch and kerf as needed. Also some ting to consider, when I am sawing with my 3 tph saw there is a lot of energy expended to work the blade through the wood and you must have come thing substantial to hold the plank.

[Bill Rhodus]

Damn, I can't believe my last several posts; some of the word selection/spelling is awful. Gotta figure out howhat to turn off the communist word corrector on my new phone.

[Mark AJ Allen]

As Tony said in his post, a frame saw really feels awkward when you are used to a hand saw. I do believe if you don't want a bandsaw and intend to resawing a significant amount of lumber, the frame saw has advantages over a hand saw. Couple of things to keep in mind if you decide to make a frame saw; buy a 3" or 4" wide saw blade that you can sharpen rather than using a bandsaw blade. Most bandsaw blades have induction hardened teeth that you cannot file. If the bandsaw blade is wide enough you can grind away the hardened teeth and start over but it is a lot of work. I think Blackburn charged me a little more than $100 for a 4"×48" blade. The wider blade is also easier to keep on track as you are sawing long lines and you can alter the pitch and kerf as needed. Also some ting to consider, when I am sawing with my 3 tph saw there is a lot of energy expended to work the blade through the wood and you must have come thing substantial to hold the plank.

Just to add a bit more wisdom based on my own experience for those interested in making their own frame saw. All of my recommendations are based on a few prototypes I made from various bowsaw and bandsaw blades and finally, my current frame saw made from a 3’ long, 4” wide, 2.3 TPI sawplate from Blackburn Tools. Also keep in mind I’m a weekend warrior so time is not a factor in these recommendations. If you want to save time, get a bandsaw.

1. Get the widest blade possible. It will have the most beam strength while cutting and require less tension across the blade to keep it taunt so it tracks better. It’s also more responsive to correction by the sawyer. My experience is that it should be at least 1" but more doesn't hurt and adds mass. I believe the 4” wide is more than sufficient.

2. TPI is a balancing act of based on cut length and ultimately, your technique.

As the cut length shortens, less teeth are in the cut. This means there is the pressure caused by the mass of the saw and force of the user is on fewer teeth. Even with a light touch, the mass of the saw might be enough to cause the teeth to dig too much to prevent sawing.

As the cut length increases, you need bigger teeth (or larger gullets more accurately) to remove all the waste being created. Otherwise, most of your effort is wasted in moving a saw without cutting anything.

These two factors impact technique. Do you cut along the short width all the way through? Do you rotate the board doing each corner until you cut through? Are you a long edge sawyer? I don't have more solid numbers to indicate ideal TPI for various situations but based on typical lumber sizes and all the ways above, I would recommend a saw with 4-5 TPI.

3. Length of sawplate. For me the ideal frame saw has a sawplate equal to your arm length plus a few inches. This allows you to use the full extension of your arm in the stroke and prevent the hardware smacking into your lumber on every stroke. The compromise is that you must start your cut on the saw at the most difficult point on the saw; nearest to the handle. This is only if the saw design is a traditional frame saw (a la Roubo)

4. Design. My current saw does not have this upgraded design but it would recommend it; add a handle extension so that the starting point of the cut near the frame is more balanced. Again the ideal length for this extension would make the saw almost twice as long as the traditional Roubo design but in reality can be shorter because the sawyer can compensate by some downward force on the handle. Make the handle length removeable/adjustable for storage and balancing.

[Roger Rettenmeier]

Here is a 28 in. Disston that has about 3/ 8 in of plate filed off, filed concave, and with misshapen teeth304347304348304349 . It might be a candidate for a frame saw, 28 inches with 2 inches at the toe. Here is a picture of the full plate D8 beneath the saw in photo 3.304350304351 The handle photo shows my repair job. The top of the handle was busted off from the thumbhole to the back of the handle. I think this pre 1928 Disston got busted and spent 85 years in a barn, and still has a near full plate.

[Mike Allen1010]

Lots of great information here from the previous posters. I thought I would throw in my two cents.

I do a fair amount of re-sawing hardwoods by hand, particularly in wider boards because my cheesy bandsaw has a maximum re-saw capacity of about 5". I also enjoy the exercise, but am not as young as I used to be.

FWIW:

* Wood selection is key. The Harder/more dense the wood, the more difficult this job becomes and at some level of hardness is for me just not feasible. Most kiln dried domestic hardwoods are doable, but I have quit in the middle of re-sawing some dense tropical woods because was just too slow and painful.

* I have had poor results with typical frame saws, because as some of the other posters mentioned, with a relatively narrow blade it is much harder to stay consistently on the layout line (especially on the backside of the cut), as compared to a typical Western "panel style" saw.

* IMHO, the most important elements of saw selection for re-sawing are panel length/width and tooth geometry ( in order: pitch (the number of teeth per inch), rake angle, set and sloped gullets).

Personally I like long, wide, premium model saws with significant taper ground into the plate for all ripping, and particularly for re-sawing. I think these factors matter more when ripping (as compared to cross cutting) because – longer cuts, removing more would. Long/wide saw plates have more mass and for me, are easier to maintain the momentum of the teeth moving through the long kerf in re-sawing. Also long/wide plates are better able to absorb the significant heat that gets generated during a long rip cut without distorting/dramatically expanding.

Set: Premium models whose plates generally have superior tensioning, often done by hand on an anvil, and more pronounced taper grind ( thicker at the tooth line and thinner at the top line), also pay a big dividend when ripping/re-sawing because they allow you to get away with less set. Consider the numbers below (don't hold me to these, these are off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure there relatively in the ballpark):

Premium Saw: Plate with at the widest portion .035". Additional set added .006" = total kerf width .041"

Typical Vintage Saw: Plate with at the widest portion .040". Additional set added .009" = total kerf width .049".

Difference= .008", 20% reduction in kerf width/wood removed. Might not sound like a lot, but definitely makes a real difference in terms of speed and effort.


Pitch: lower is better, except in very hardwoods. 3- 4 PPI is optimal, but hard to find. This is where one of the new purpose built, re-sawing frame saws like the one from Blackburn tools Mark mentioned could really excel. I have no personal experience so couldn't comment.

Rake angle: lower is faster. The trade-off is lower rake angle (0°-5°) can be harder to start and is more likely to "catch" if you hit a knot etc. With a little practice and experience these two things are fairly easy to overcome. The Disston factory standard rake angle prior to 1928 was 5° of rake. Post 1928, their customers weren't quite as experienced with handsaw's and they went to 8° of rake, for greater ease-of-use. I file most of my coarse pitch rip saw's between zero and 5°, however I "have a bad handsaw problem", so I have other rippers with more PPI/more rake angle for when a smoother finished surface is more important than speed.

Sloped gullets: this refers to lowering the handle the file below horizontal when filing the leading edge of a tooth. These can be further enhanced by using a smaller file than otherwise called for by the pitch/PPI to further exaggerate the depth of the gullets. The net result is a sloped gullet can carry more sawdust (is deeper) than one filed straight across (saw file Horizontal). The sawdust carrying capacity of gullets is important because once the gullets fills up with sawdust, the teeth stop cutting. This is particularly relevant in re-sawing because when you have a lot of teeth buried in the cut, it's more likely the gullets will fill up before the teeth exit the kerf.

Just my two cents, YMMV.

All the best, Mike

[Winton Applegate]

induction hardened teeth that you cannot file.

See that is what happens when I don't know any better . . .:confused:
and don't know what I am not supposed to be able to do . . .:confused::eek:
I just went a head and did it not knowing it was impossible. :cool::D:cool:

I had a little help but I love these thing (http://www.amazon.com/EZE-LAP-PAK5-Color-Coded-Diamond/dp/B002RL83DQ/ref=sr_1_6?s=industrial&ie=UTF8&qid=1421375920&sr=1-6&keywords=diamond+paddle)s and use them for all sorts of metal working and carbide cutters. Very lightly of course just to keep them sharp; not to take out big nicks.:)

I might take a look at that Blackburn wide blade though. Sounds like a good thing.
When I made my saw I looked everywhere in catalogs and stores and found nothing.
We've come a long way baby.

[Winton Applegate]

Sawing with the frame saw is a different dance than with the panel saw.
Length can be much longer with the frame saw because you rock your whole body rather than use roughly your arm length. See the photo of Bob Moran using his shop made frame saw. This photo is from his book (http://www.amazon.com/Woodworking-Technique-Practical-Job--Choose/dp/0875967124/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1421383800&sr=1-1&keywords=bob+moran+the+right+technique). That is what I went by to make my frame saw and use it.

I always enjoy showing these other photos of my Heroes reasawing. Toshio Odate showing how it's done with the big 'O Japanese saw and Frank Klausz and his brother resawing a plank for old times sake. This photo was in FWW. (if I remember right).

The last photo was the absolute best I could come up with, back ten years ago or so, for coarse tooth rip/resaw saws before I built the frame saw. I refiled the Japanese saw to a full rip from a combination tooth pattern. They were still no where coarse enough. Was fun on the narrower stuff but I needed much more length for the big planks I mentioned earlier. If I could have found a saw like Toshio's I would have bought it but nada. The frame saw was totally useful . . .
but
I either needed a second person on the other end to help stay on the line on the back side or I had to keep flipping the eighty pound purple heart and bubbinga planks. That got tedious.

PS: I don't recall much heat being generated and I waxed the blade occasionally and wedged the kerf if I was getting some blade pinch.
Ultimately it was the endless flipping to stay on the line and the unwieldy length for my eight foot ceilings that brought me to sink so low as to buy the Laguna band saw.
I was looking at an eight inch power jointer or combo euro planer/jointer at the same time and wound up not getting either so give me some Neander points there.

[Roger Rettenmeier]

I searched "frame saw" on this site, and came up with a few more threads and a lot more good information.