Make bow saw for resawing?

[Kirby Krieger]

Hi. New to woodworking; have some experience using tools. I do not have a bandsaw and don't find either of the following worth pursuing right now:
- buying an inexpensive band saw which I will soon find inadequate, or
- buying an expensive band saw.

For the time being, I'd like to be able to resaw hardwood (mostly 4/4, but including 3/4 to 12/4, some of it exotic and hard) by hand. I have had some success resawing with the "Classic 700" bow saw fit with the 32mm Turbo-Cut Japanese-style blade (sold widely — I got mine from Highland Woodworking (http://www.highlandwoodworking.com/classic700framesaw.aspx)). I _think_ a taller blade would track better, and that any loss in efficiency due to drag on the blade faces would be more than offset by tracking well and therefore removing less wood. Imho, the Turbo-Cut blade works well. (I started with and continue to use Japanese-style saws.) There is a 550mm Turbo-Cut blade available (https://www.dictum.com/en/tools/woodworking-metalworking/saws/mitre-saws-saw-guides/712980/turbo-cut-mitre-saw-blade-550) that is 45mm tall. Since I can't find a suitable saw that holds this blade (it is made for a miter saw), I am considering either making one (I have made a 12" Turning Bow Saw from the Gramercy kit that Tools for Working Wood sells (https://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/store/item/GT-BOWS.XX/Gramercy_Tools_Bow_Saw_Kits_and_Parts)), or purchasing another "Classic" bow saw and making a stretcher for it that would allow the 550mm blade to be tensioned and used.

As a beginner, there _are_ reasons to re-invent the wheel — nonetheless, I'd like to roll on a smooth path and avoid unnecessary roots and rocks. Any suggestions?

Some additional notes and questions:
- I know that at 550mm (toothline c. 500mm, 18") I won't be resawing anything over 10"wide, if even that.
- I am very much interested in the figure in individual boards. The width limit of c. 10" is not, at present, a hinderance.
- Does anyone have a source for the hardware that fits these Turbo-Cut blades (blade holders, handles)?
- I am not wedded to the Turbo-Cut blades, but since I have never sharpened a saw they provide a utility that is valuable to me.
- I think at this size a bow saw performs as well as a frame saw (afaict, bow saws have one stretcher in compression; frame saws have two).
- Would I get similar or better results with a large back saw, such as the 16" one Bad Axe sells (or even just a large regular Western-style saw)?
- I am a member of Shannon Roger's Hand Tool School (http://www.handtoolschool.net). One of the future projects is making a large frame saw for resawing (http://www.handtoolschool.net/compound-joinery/).

Thank you.

[Paul Sidener]

There are going to be many opinions on the best way to resaw boards down. I think the way to go would be the Shannon Rogers and Tom Fidgen go about it. I don't know if they do it exactly the same, but I think they are close. Tom Figen uses a kerfing plane and a frame saw. The kerfing plane starts the kerf, giving the saw a path to follow. You also mentioned Bad Axe, they sell a kit to make both, the kerning plane and frame saw. The problem with using a backsaw is you can only saw till you get to the back, maybe 4 inches.

http://www.badaxetoolworks.com/kpfs

[Bill White]

First off, you want a FRAME SAW, not a bow saw. BIG difference.
Bill

[Kirby Krieger]

First off, you want a FRAME SAW, not a bow saw. BIG difference.
Bill

Hi Bill — can you elaborate on what the difference in performance is, as long as the blade is the same? As I noted, I'm not talking about boards any wider than c. 10". Thanks.

[Patrick Chase]

Hi Bill — can you elaborate on what the difference in performance is, as long as the blade is the same? As I noted, I'm not talking about boards any wider than c. 10". Thanks.

The difference is that Europeans traditionally use one, 'Mericans traditionally use the other, and both think the other is completely wrong.

You already know what a bow saw looks like, so here's a picture of a frame saw as made from the Bad Axe kit: http://www.theunpluggedwoodshop.com/the-frame-saw-part-two.html

The frame saw is symmetric from side to side when set up for resawing, whereas the bowsaw has to be tilted to one side or the other so that its frame clears the workpiece. IMO you can get used to either, though there will undoubtedly be more vehement opinions :-).

[Kirby Krieger]

Hi Paul — thanks for the reply and the link.

Is the depth-of-cut limit imposed by the back of the back saw the only disadvantage of using one for resawing? The Bad Axe 16" Tenon saw has 4" of blade under the back — in theory one could resaw any length of board up to almost 8" wide. Bad Axe also sells an 18" saw with 5" of blade under the back — the "Roubo Beastmaster (http://www.badaxetoolworks.com/the-roubo-beastmaster.php)" — which would — again, in theory — allow one to resaw any length of board up to almost 10" wide.

While those widths are smaller than what I think I'd be able to do with the 18" blade I'm considering making a bow saw for, they are close enough that I might consider the back saw — which of course has other uses — solution. It may be a silly idea — I don't have the experience to know.

More particularly: what argues against using a bow saw with a 1 ½" blade for resawing boards up to 10" wide?

[Warren Mickley]

I have used a Roubo type Veneer saw for about 35 years. A few notes. For resawing you want a saw with about 3 teeth per inch. If the teeth are small, the gullet fills up with sawdust before it gets out of the kerf, which makes a mess. For the same reason, you want a saw that is considerably more than twice as long than the thickness you are trying to saw. Otherwise some of the teeth don't get out of the cut to release their sawdust. For a ten inch board you want 25 or thirty inches long. A back saw is not appropriate for resawing: too short, teeth too small, back in the way. The "Roubo Beastmaster" bears no resemblance to anything in Andre Roubo's three volume work.

A 1 1/2 inch blade will work. A wider blade is all right, but if you start off a little crooked, it is tough to make a correction.
335631

[Stew Denton]

Kirby,

I think you should consider a saw with a longer blade than 18." I don't resaw much, but when I have I usually have the lumber at a 45 degree angle away from me. I first cut to the line facing me and to the line on the end of the lumber, then flip the lumber 180 degrees and cut on the opposite side of the same end, and when nearly cutting the full width of the lumber I again swap the board around. I continue to do that until the ripping is complete.

If you do that and have the blade going all the way through a 10" (true 10" not a 1X10) at a 45 degree angle, then the length of the blade inside the lumber is about 15 inches, which only gives you 3 inches of saw movement. Thus the need for a longer blade.

I don't recommend sawing at a 90 degree angle to the length of the lumber, sawing at a 45 degree angle is much easier to keep centered and true.

If I am not understanding you correctly then my concerns may not be valid. Just a thought.

Sorry Warren, I had the same idea you did, but didn't see your post until after I had started and posted mine. I think that Warren does a much better job of the details of why you want the greater length than I did.

Stew

[Luke Dupont]

I would use a long, rip cut bow-saw blade mounted in a frame as others have suggested above (not a bow saw).

Here's a blade that would work: http://www.highlandwoodworking.com/continentalframesawripblade.aspx

It's 5tpi, and around 28". I've considered using it to making a frame saw myself.

I would not recommend Japanese blades, as they're generally universal cut, and you really want a coarse rip tooth pattern for this.

Edit:

Hi Paul — thanks for the reply and the link.

Is the depth-of-cut limit imposed by the back of the back saw the only disadvantage of using one for resawing?
How long of a board are you trying to resaw? If you're just going for 10x10, and your bowsaw has 5" of clearance, then go ahead. Though, you'll definitely need a saw with more than 24" or so of blade, I'd imagine. 18" won't cut it.

If you're planning on using a bow saw with a turning blade to resaw longer lengths, I'd just make a square frame instead, as that will be *much* easier to control. If you want to use your blade in a bow saw later, just build a bow-saw body for it and take it out of the square frame.

[Kirby Krieger]

Thanks for all the good info.

If I understand correctly, a 4-tpi rough cross-cut blade (https://www.highlandwoodworking.com/continentalframesawroughcrosscutblade.aspx) would make for better resawing than the Turbo-Cut blade? (Afaict, the Turbo-Cut blade cuts as well _in general_, but may be less suitable to resawing due to gullet-clogging.) The linked blade fits the Classic 700 and has c 25" of teeth.


The "Roubo Beastmaster" bears no resemblance to anything in Andre Roubo's three volume work.

I've unfortunately given you that out of context. Mark Harrell, the man behind Bad Axe Tool Works, knows saws. The "Roubo" in the name of that back saw is taken from the famous "double sliding dovetail tenon joint piercing through a massive 5" thick benchtop" of the now-celebrated Roubo workbench.

The (bad) idea of possibly using a large back saw to resaw small lumber is mine alone.

Bad Axe — as mentioned in this thread — makes the blades and supplies the hardware for Fidgen's kerfing plane and frame saw kit (http://www.badaxetoolworks.com/kpfs.php) (Fidgen got his original custom blades from Bad Axe). The two of them have paired up to present a saw-making extravaganza (http://www.badaxetoolworks.com/sawlapalooza.php) this summer (sold out).

Thanks again for all the useable information ;) .

[Luke Dupont]

Thanks for all the good info.

If I understand correctly, a 4-tpi rough cross-cut blade (https://www.highlandwoodworking.com/continentalframesawroughcrosscutblade.aspx) would make for better resawing than the Turbo-Cut blade? (Afaict, the Turbo-Cut blade cuts as well _in general_, but may be less suitable to resawing due to gullet-clogging.) The linked blade fits the Classic 700 and has c 25" of teeth.



I've unfortunately given you that out of context. Mark Harrell, the man behind Bad Axe Tool Works, knows saws. The "Roubo" in the name of that back saw is taken from the famous "double sliding dovetail tenon joint piercing through a massive 5" thick benchtop" of the now-celebrated Roubo workbench.

The (bad) idea of possibly using a large back saw to resaw small lumber is mine alone.

Bad Axe — as mentioned in this thread — makes the blades and supplies the hardware for Fidgen's kerfing plane and frame saw kit (http://www.badaxetoolworks.com/kpfs.php) (Fidgen got his original custom blades from Bad Axe). The two of them have paired up to present a saw-making extravaganza (http://www.badaxetoolworks.com/sawlapalooza.php) this summer (sold out).

Thanks again for all the useable information ;) .

No. You want a rip cut, not a cross cut. The blade I linked to, though it is 5tpi, will work much better than a cross-cut pattern. Crosscut teeth are not very efficient at cutting along with the grain. Rip teeth are vastly superior for that.

[Kirby Krieger]

Hi Stew — I'm glad you posted — thanks. All good and helpful info. You do understand correctly, afaict. I tried the "4-corners" method but got better results — at least the one time I tried — with two shallow corners on one long side, but deep enough to meet in the middle and leave a kerf on that side the length of the board, and then completing the cut sawing across the slightly down the length of the board with the already-made kerf in the back and following my gauge-mark in the front. I should emphasize that I have yet to resaw anything in a way that I deemed worth repeating — hence my appeal to everyone here. I will change to a better-selected blade (and maybe saw), make sure it's long enough relative to the board, and give the 4-corners method a few more tries. Thanks again.

[Kirby Krieger]

No. You want a rip cut, not a cross cut. The blade I linked to, though it is 5tpi, will work much better than a cross-cut pattern. Crosscut teeth are not very efficient at cutting along with the grain. Rip teeth are vastly superior for that.

Thanks Luke — was about to post this very question in response to your other post when your reply here popped up. Will go with the 5-TPI rip rather than the 4-TPI crosscut.

I apologize for the green-ness of my wood horns. Everyone's help makes my beginner's steps into something that might be mistaken for a stride :) .

[Luke Dupont]

Thanks Luke — was about to post this very question in response to your other post when your reply here popped up. Will go with the 5-TPI rip rather than the 4-TPI crosscut.

I apologize for the green-ness of my wood horns. Everyone's help makes my beginner's steps into something that might be mistaken for a stride :) .

Haha - no problem. My horns are only very slightly less green than yours, I'm sure - and this community is very welcoming and willing to help :)

Edit: One thing to note on those blades. While I think they're definitely the best option out there, and they'll work out of the box, you may need to touch up the teeth with a file to get the most out of them. They don't come all that sharp from the factory. But, resharpening your saw is something you'll have to learn anyway, so now's as good a time as any!
Don't worry about setting the teeth, though. If anything, you might want to reduce the set, but I'd leave it as it is for what you're doing. But then, that's just my guess; someone more experienced might have better advise.

[Stew Denton]

Hi Kirby, thanks for the nice comment, but I have only done a moderate amount of re-sawing myself. The method you described above was fairly similar to what worked best for me, however, I normally saw nearly to the far corner of the end without stopping in the center, but what you describe may work better than what I do, I don't know.

I don't have a bow saw, but am thinking about making one, and also have thought about a frame saw. SHMBO has advised me that I need to stop buying woodworking stuff for a while though, so it will be a couple of months or so probably.

Since I don't have a bow saw, I use my much loved 7 point rip carpenters saw. It seems to work fine, but I think it is likely much slower than a frame saw. Also, from Warrens comments above, I should be using my 4 1/2 point rip instead of my 7 pt. I don't have a 3 point rip saw, the 4 1/2 is the closest thing I have to that.

Thank you for doing the post, I learn things from folks like Warren and the others too.

Stew

[Reinis Kanders]

David Weaver has a couple of interesting videos on youtube on making a frame saw. If you have a space then bandsaw is hard to beat though and if you are mostly handtooler then I do not see a need for any of the bandsaws that are over $1K

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1GHQwYoux0

[george wilson]

In the movie we made about spinet harpsichord and violin making in the 18th. C.,we used an original veneer saw to saw the thin leaves of cypress to line the interior of the spinet with. Yes,the ORIGINAL spinet we copied had cypress veneer on the inside. Seems like an unusual choice of wood! The original was an English spinet. The cypress veneer had to have grown in Italy or Spain. They used it for boats and coffins most commonly. Flamenco guitars have Mediterranean cypress backs and sides. It is not at all an exciting wood to look at. Light and strong,though,and rot resistant.

The old veneer saw had a great blade about 3" wide,and very thin. It has been since 1974,but I'd guess from memory that it was no thicker than .030" thick. About 3 or 4 teeth per inch. Heavy frame,capable of holding the blade in high tension. It was very similar to the veneer saw seen in Diderot,which I believe Warren showed several posts back.

We accurately sawed several leaves of veneer 1/8" thick with the old saw,which happened to still be quite sharp. When planed smooth,this produced veneer about 1/16" thick,as was usual in the 18th. C..

[Pat Barry]

The fellow in this article (http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/arts-mysteries-blogs/the-emperors-new-frame-saw)doesn't really care for framesaws, especially for veneer work

[Luke Dupont]

The fellow in this article (http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/arts-mysteries-blogs/the-emperors-new-frame-saw)doesn't really care for framesaws, especially for veneer work

I've seen that article before. Seems rather biased and unsubstantial. It's aim is just to cast doubt and reinterpret things through the eyes of the writer, rather than actually getting at any kind of historical truth.

[Mel Fulks]

Pat,thanks for posting that. I agree with Luke, the guy's conclusion seems to be 'this ain't easy'. The nameless workmen in the drawing knew it took skill and developed it.

[Pat Barry]

No doubt a bandsaw is the best choice for resawing, unless you only need to do a small amount in which case why not just use a ripsaw. The framesaw seems to be relatively unmanageable (I'm sure this will create feedback) as I was watching Roy Underhill try to use one just this last weekend. It looked to be a very clumsy tool. Now, obviously I don't have one but I do feel the author of the article had some basis for his conclusions including the backing of Popular Woodworking magazine.

[Pat Barry]

Pat,thanks for posting that. I agree with Luke, the guy's conclusion seems to be 'this ain't easy'. The nameless workmen in the drawing knew it took skill and developed it.
It makes the tool more manageable to have two folks to use it. My previous comment was with regard to a single user.

[Mike Allen1010]

I have used a Roubo type Veneer saw for about 35 years. A few notes. For resawing you want a saw with about 3 teeth per inch. If the teeth are small, the gullet fills up with sawdust before it gets out of the kerf, which makes a mess. For the same reason, you want a saw that is considerably more than twice as long than the thickness you are trying to saw. Otherwise some of the teeth don't get out of the cut to release their sawdust. For a ten inch board you want 25 or thirty inches long. A back saw is not appropriate for resawing: too short, teeth too small, back in the way. The "Roubo Beastmaster" bears no resemblance to anything in Andre Roubo's three volume work.

A 1 1/2 inch blade will work. A wider blade is all right, but if you start off a little crooked, it is tough to make a correction.
335631

+1 to what Warren said. You can establish the kerf with a back saw, but to make the cut you NEED a longer saw plate.

I've gone down this path of making bow saws for re-sawing and have never had much luck getting a straight cut. I've had better results with 28" , 4 PPI rip saw, but those are hard to find. If you want to go the handsaw route, a big frame saw is the way to go. Shannon has several blog posts about building/using several frame saws and should be good reference for details/sources.

Best, Mike

[george wilson]

First of all,that saw repro in the article referred to in post #18,is WAYYYY totally too light in the frame. I can't comment on the blade since I can't see it well. But,Marcus and I sawed our veneer on one camera take with no rehearsals. We had never used that veneer saw before. BUT WE KNOW HOW TO SAW. We did not even bother to make saw cuts to start the big teeth in.

I find it rather strange that a person would make a saw totally too light(and,who knows what the blade was like,or how the teeth were formed,filed up,etc.,etc.) and then COMPLAIN about its performance.

Look up our film on youtube by Googling George Wilson harpsichord. It is in 6 parts. See if it looks to you like we are having any trouble with the saw. The original saw cut perfectly accurate and quickly advanced through the wood. They knew how to make saws in the 18th. C.. And,we were fortunate enough to have a great example to use in the film.

I wish certain magazines would stop letting half baked hobby level workmen do their articles. It would help if they had an experienced craftsman as editor. Most often the editor is a business man,trying to put out magazines to sell,getting articles from hobbyists who WORK CHEAP and do it mostly because they like to see their NAME IN PRINT. These writers soon begin to be seen as authorities,but may NOT BE SO. I got pretty aggravated years ago with the "Home Shop Machinist" for putting out articles full of blatant errors and untruths in their articles. When I wrote to the editor,he replied that "He had not labored in the vineyard!" That was really the last straw and I cancelled my subscription. Not the last subscription I have canceled,either!!!!!

As for Diderot,the pictures are artist's interpretations of workers. Based upon things looking artistic rather than necessarily correct. And,there is a lot of misinformation in Diderot since craftsmen did not want to give up their trade secrets,and many of them thought Diderot was a spy,or some kind of a nut. No one EVER before had been concerned about how craftsmen worked. In the harpsichord section,there are pictures totally WRONG about how their soundboards are braced.

To remark about Diderot's illustrations,you have to have a decent background on how things were done in the 18th. C.. Artists were primarily concerned with making people look graceful,and,in many cases look educated. Their subjects were most often depicted standing in a ballet position. Women or girls of the wealthy were often shown with their feet in the 3rd. ballet position. This is with the heel of one foot placed in the center of the other foot,which is turned sideways from the position of the body. This was to show that they were educated in the arts. Often their subjects(who were most often wealthy),were painted holding a book,or with a telescope,etc. to show that they were educated. Since artists were used to depicting their subjects looking thus,it spilled over into Diderot. Artists were not USED to depicting poor,ragged,working class workmen,working in shacks filled with detritus of all kinds.

Their shops in Diderot are depicted spotlessly clean,and inside an elaborate stone building. Another artist's effort to make his subjects look good since that is what they were used to doing.

I might add,for no good reason,that COUNTRY gentlemen,English ones in particular,(who had a lot of money,but did not wish to try looking sophisticated),often had themselves painted holding a gun,to show that they were sportsmen. I recall one really great painting of a country gentleman with his whole pack of beagles. There were a LOT of these dogs in the VERY LARGE painting,and every one of them had a little banner in front of them showing their names! Clearly,his dogs were the most important thing in this gentleman's life!

So,take Diderot with a grain of salt. Maybe a LARGE CHUNK of SALT!!!!:) There are definitely things worth seeing in Diderot. A lot of tools,for example. But,remember the things I have just written before you make any conclusions.

[Paul Sidener]

Hi Paul — thanks for the reply and the link.

Is the depth-of-cut limit imposed by the back of the back saw the only disadvantage of using one for resawing? The Bad Axe 16" Tenon saw has 4" of blade under the back — in theory one could resaw any length of board up to almost 8" wide. Bad Axe also sells an 18" saw with 5" of blade under the back — the "Roubo Beastmaster (http://www.badaxetoolworks.com/the-roubo-beastmaster.php)" — which would — again, in theory — allow one to resaw any length of board up to almost 10" wide.

While those widths are smaller than what I think I'd be able to do with the 18" blade I'm considering making a bow saw for, they are close enough that I might consider the back saw — which of course has other uses — solution. It may be a silly idea — I don't have the experience to know.

More particularly: what argues against using a bow saw with a 1 ½" blade for resawing boards up to 10" wide?

Basically a bow saw, the blade is in line with the frame. A frame saw, the blade is perpendicular to the frame. With a frame saw, you can cut any length board.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_cuVge6-o0&ebc=ANyPxKq1MfPIIDnN0JHBeN5pEwNelAcd5Cxj9-TuQpoxhpj53_8I49dXohjkBY15o9Hym11Tidsf&nohtml5=Fal se

In the video, they are using a larger two man saw. You can make a shorter saw to use by yourself. When used with a kerfing plane, it is actually very easy to saw straight. If you find the book "The Unplugged Workshop" by Tom Fidgen, he talks about the saw and plane. It is a good read.

[Pat Barry]

First of all,that saw repro in the article referred to in post #18,is WAYYYY totally too light in the frame. I can't comment on the blade since I can't see it well. But,Marcus and I sawed our veneer on one camera take with no rehearsals. We had never used that veneer saw before. BUT WE KNOW HOW TO SAW. We did not even bother to make saw cuts to start the big teeth in.

I find it rather strange that a person would make a saw totally too light(and,who knows what the blade was like,or how the teeth were formed,filed up,etc.,etc.) and then COMPLAIN about its performance.

Look up our film on youtube by Googling George Wilson harpsichord. It is in 6 parts. See if it looks to you like we are having any trouble with the saw. The original saw cut perfectly accurate and quickly advanced through the wood. They knew how to make saws in the 18th. C.. And,we were fortunate enough to have a great example to use in the film.

I wish certain magazines would stop letting half baked hobby level workmen do their articles. It would help if they had an experienced craftsman as editor. Most often the editor is a business man,trying to put out magazines to sell,getting articles from hobbyists who WORK CHEAP and do it mostly because they like to see their NAME IN PRINT. These writers soon begin to be seen as authorities,but may NOT BE SO. I got pretty aggravated years ago with the "Home Shop Machinist" for putting out articles full of blatant errors and untruths in their articles. When I wrote to the editor,he replied that "He had not labored in the vineyard!" That was really the last straw and I cancelled my subscription. Not the last subscription I have canceled,either!!!!!

As for Diderot,the pictures are artist's interpretations of workers. Based upon things looking artistic rather than necessarily correct. And,there is a lot of misinformation in Diderot since craftsmen did not want to give up their trade secrets,and many of them thought Diderot was a spy,or some kind of a nut. No one EVER before had been concerned about how craftsmen worked. In the harpsichord section,there are pictures totally WRONG about how their soundboards are braced.

To remark about Diderot's illustrations,you have to have a decent background on how things were done in the 18th. C.. Artists were primarily concerned with making people look graceful,and,in many cases look educated. Their subjects were most often depicted standing in a ballet position. Women or girls of the wealthy were often shown with their feet in the 3rd. ballet position. This is with the heel of one foot placed in the center of the other foot,which is turned sideways from the position of the body. This was to show that they were educated in the arts. Often their subjects(who were most often wealthy),were painted holding a book,or with a telescope,etc. to show that they were educated. Since artists were used to depicting their subjects looking thus,it spilled over into Diderot. Artists were not USED to depicting poor,ragged,working class workmen,working in shacks filled with detritus of all kinds.

Their shops in Diderot are depicted spotlessly clean,and inside an elaborate stone building. Another artist's effort to make his subjects look good since that is what they were used to doing.

I might add,for no good reason,that COUNTRY gentlemen,English ones in particular,(who had a lot of money,but did not wish to try looking sophisticated),often had themselves painted holding a gun,to show that they were sportsmen. I recall one really great painting of a country gentleman with his whole pack of beagles. There were a LOT of these dogs in the VERY LARGE painting,and every one of them had a little banner in front of them showing their names! Clearly,his dogs were the most important thing in this gentleman's life!

So,take Diderot with a grain of salt. Maybe a LARGE CHUNK of SALT!!!!:) There are definitely things worth seeing in Diderot. A lot of tools,for example. But,remember the things I have just written before you make any conclusions.
I found George's you tube video. Here is a link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K48FezBoPWg&nohtml5=False
The re-sawing happens at the 5 minute mark.
Its done with two people.

[Brian Holcombe]

They are moving through that cypress at a very good pace. I can tell you for certain that is faster than a panel saw and appears to be less strenuous on the sawyers.

[Steve Voigt]

The fellow in this article (http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/arts-mysteries-blogs/the-emperors-new-frame-saw)doesn't really care for framesaws, especially for veneer work

It's a shame that people keep dredging up that article. Maybe PW should put a disclaimer at the end of it, because his claims have been pretty conclusively disproven by multiple videos: for example by Dave Weaver, Shannon Rodgers, Tom Fidgen, etc. Dave even has a video where he walks through the situations in which the frame saw is faster than a very coarse rip saw (and if you've seen him on camera, Dave can book through lumber with a coarse saw, so that's saying something).

Anyway, it's pretty clear that the frame saw does work, and that Adam had some design flaws that prevented him from using a saw like that to its potential.

[Pat Barry]

It's a shame that people keep dredging up that article. Maybe PW should put a disclaimer at the end of it, because his claims have been pretty conclusively disproven by multiple videos: for example by Dave Weaver, Shannon Rodgers, Tom Fidgen, etc. Dave even has a video where he walks through the situations in which the frame saw is faster than a very coarse rip saw (and if you've seen him on camera, Dave can book through lumber with a coarse saw, so that's saying something).

Anyway, it's pretty clear that the frame saw does work, and that Adam had some design flaws that prevented him from using a saw like that to its potential.
Well, its out there, and its is presented by Popular Woodworking so it does have that going for it. I'd be interested in a couple of those other video's. Perhaps you could share a link or two?

[george wilson]

I doubt personally that being a POP Woodworking article lends a lot of authority to it. Not after the fallacious other articles I have seen in their magazine. Articles that are sometimes written by authors with less knowledge than the readers.

[Patrick Chase]

First of all,that saw repro in the article referred to in post #18,is WAYYYY totally too light in the frame. I can't comment on the blade since I can't see it well. But,Marcus and I sawed our veneer on one camera take with no rehearsals. We had never used that veneer saw before. BUT WE KNOW HOW TO SAW. We did not even bother to make saw cuts to start the big teeth in.

Out of curiosity what do you think of the Bad Axe framesaw kit (http://www.badaxetoolworks.com/kpfs)?

[Steve Voigt]

I'd be interested in a couple of those other video's. Perhaps you could share a link or two?

Reinis already linked to one above. I'm sure you can Google and find the others.

[Patrick Chase]

I doubt personally that being a POP Woodworking article lends a lot of authority to it. Not after the fallacious other articles I have seen in their magazine. Articles that are sometimes written by authors with less knowledge than the readers.

This is the second time this week we've had a debate over something ridiculous from Cherubini (he also authored one of the "olde timers didn't flatten their tools and you shouldn't either" pieces that was quoted in the flattening thread).

Strike two...

[Steve Voigt]

I think "ridiculous" might be a bit harsh. There's no doubt Adam had some decidedly idiosyncratic ideas--for example, suggesting that mortise chisels should be used in paring fashion, without a mallet, to dig out mortises--but I think it's mostly a case of ideas that were not quite ready for prime time.

On a related note, I don't think PW should be excoriated for any inaccuracies in Adam's column. He's long gone, and I suspect whoever hired him is too. Last I heard (and this was a while ago), Peter Follansbee was writing that column, and it's hard to think of anyone more qualified.

[Patrick Chase]

I think "ridiculous" might be a bit harsh. There's no doubt Adam had some decidedly idiosyncratic ideas--for example, suggesting that mortise chisels should be used in paring fashion, without a mallet, to dig out mortises--but I think it's mostly a case of ideas that were not quite ready for prime time.

Yeah, fair enough. I overdid it (but hey, George and I *agreed* about something!)

Paring with mortise chisels sounds like a fun one. I'm sure that's exactly what the toolmakers had in mind when they put super beefy handles and leather washers on those old pigstickers.

[John Kananis]

George, those videos from 1976 were just plain awesome. Are there any others floating around out there? If so, I'd be VERY interested - especially the violin making but I'll take anything. :)

Sorry to take this OT.

[Pat Barry]

David Weaver has a couple of interesting videos on youtube on making a frame saw. If you have a space then bandsaw is hard to beat though and if you are mostly handtooler then I do not see a need for any of the bandsaws that are over $1K

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1GHQwYoux0
He does say at the 17:30 minute mark that he's "not sure the frame saw is worth the trouble". At that point he had commented that the rip saw he was using was pretty fast. I think you have to admit that the frame saw he was using at about 48 inches was probably well suited for two people and poorly suited for one person.

[Reinis Kanders]

Cherubini was fun though, too bad he is not on the scene anymore. I think he also was an ME or something like that.


This is the second time this week we've had a debate over something ridiculous from Cherubini (he also authored one of the "olde timers didn't flatten their tools and you shouldn't either" pieces that was quoted in the flattening thread).

Strike two...

[Reinis Kanders]

I agree about that that is why I have my Jet 14" bandsaw, it can do up to 12" re-saw, good enough for me. Thankfully I do not have the space for any heavy machinery.


He does say at the 17:30 minute mark that he's "not sure the frame saw is worth the trouble". At that point he had commented that the rip saw he was using was pretty fast. I think you have to admit that the frame saw he was using at about 48 inches was probably well suited for two people and poorly suited for one person.

[Patrick Chase]

George, those videos from 1976 were just plain awesome. Are there any others floating around out there? If so, I'd be VERY interested - especially the violin making but I'll take anything. :)

Sorry to take this OT.

Yeah, those videos are terrific. Thanks for pointing them out. George does indeed make veneer-cutting look easy.

The low tuning on the instruments (esp the violin) that play sporadically throughout is like nails on chalkboard for me though. I had to turn the sound off a couple times.

[george wilson]

Well,Patrick,I guess you'll never make a good violin maker!!:):):) do you mean tuning the plates of the violin,or the awful violin playing? A friend of the musical consultant. And,A was 420 rather than 440 in the 18th. C.. I was using my own 18th. C. tuning fork in the film. Later,I made a copy of the 420 tuning fork for the Musical Inst. Makers to use,after I became Tool Maker.

I will say that the OLD sound recording equipment that the museum had was not of the greatest quality. I'd like to turn the sound off when that violin player is playing! He was certainly not my choice! That decision was made by the musical consultant of Williamsburg,and I had nothing to do with it.

The sound in the film "warbles" a bit,and the equipment must have been at least 20 years old that recorded the sound in the film. Too bad,really,as the film was partially about SOUND!!!!! Playing a baroque violin requires practice. I knew someone else who could have made the violin sound a LOT BETTER. But,he was not part of the "political" inner ring of the museum,i suppose.

We made 3 films,actually. There are films that include only ONE of the instruments being made. They are a lot more detailed concerning each instrument,since all the time is devoted to only one instrument. The violin making film is much more artistic.

Unfortunately,the individual films were never made available to the public. They are probably stashed away somewhere in the archives of the Audio Video Department.

Is Cherubini dead or something? Please fill me in. The way you guys talk,it sounds like he is dead.

[Patrick Chase]

Well,Patrick,I guess you'll never make a good violin maker!!:):):) do you mean tuning the plates of the violin,or the awful violin playing? A friend of the musical consultant. And,A was 420 rather than 440 in the 18th. C.. I was using my own 18th. C. tuning fork in the film. Later,I made a copy of the 420 tuning fork for the Musical Inst. Makers to use,after I became Tool Maker.

I meant the violin playing. Your work is impeccable of course.

I'm aware that's a "period" tuning. I was a moderately serious Cellist in my youth (this guy (http://jzcello.com/) was my youth symphony standmate, though by the end of high school it was clear that he would be a top-tier pro, me not so much). Unfortunately I have absolute pitch and it's trained to A440 :-).

[george wilson]

The lower pitch,REAL gut strings,and lower tension on the strings take getting used to. The Concert Master of the Baltimore Symphony was the only person I heard(he used to come to the shop and play that violin we made),who seemed to know how to make a baroque violin sound proper and good.

I later on made him a lion's head violin. He was a baroque music specialist. I made an extra lion's head which I have shown here,sometime after I made his violin. He suggested the lion head as he wanted the violin to look as "Period" as possible. Of course,the normal violin scroll peghead is the most USUAL form of peghead back then. He wanted his to stand out.


Well,I can't find pictures of his violin,but if you search for "A baroque violin I made" or maybe "A lion's head violin I made" you can probably find it. Here's a not too good picture of the extra lion's head I made.

I think that as you add pictures to the files of available pictures,some older pictures get pushed out. I don't feel like searching for the pictures right now,as I was up till 5:00 with my wife. Had to take her to a FAR AWAY hospital after she had a bad fall about midnight last night.

P.S.: "A baroque violin I made" does take you to the violin. I put "I made" on all my picture posts to make them easier to search for.

[Mark AJ Allen]

I love the discussion here; I do lots of resawing and have built all sorts of framesaws and kerfing planes to optimize my resawing technique. I think I'm getting to my really happy place with my experimentation. I could write an essay on the topic but there are some things I would like to add here:

1. Resawing with a frame saw is much more accurate than a hand saw; the plate deflects less because it's under tension
2. Resawing with a pre-established kerf is easier and allows you to correct for deflection easier with a low angle position
3. It is optimal if the kerf width equals the kerf of your resaw; if the kerf is narrow, your saw won't fit. if the kerf is too wide, it lets the saw wander more.
4. A wider sawplate is desirable on the framesaw to minimize deflection; it has more beam strength
5. Length of the framesaw plate; at least twice the width of the cut you're making + 6"
6. I found the traditional design like you see in Roubo unbalanced for single person operation; there is too much weight past the beginning of the cut and the saw digs in. I added an extended handle frame to address that on my design
7. Kerfing with a traditional saw tooth pattern is not ideal; the gullets clog very quickly. A skip tooth pattern better; the plate I have has every other tooth removed. Those still clog, but not as often
8. A one-person framesaw has to be heavy enough to apply ALL the necessary downward force so it cuts without any additional downward force from the operator; you can change that with handle configurations or just add weight

If you want, I can elaborate on the points and how I came to my conclusions. My primary source of sawplate and hardware is From Blackburn Tools.

[Pat Barry]

I love the discussion here; I do lots of resawing and have built all sorts of framesaws and kerfing planes to optimize my resawing technique. I think I'm getting to my really happy place with my experimentation. I could write an essay on the topic but there are some things I would like to add here:

1. Resawing with a frame saw is much more accurate than a hand saw; the plate deflects less because it's under tension
2. Resawing with a pre-established kerf is easier and allows you to correct for deflection easier with a low angle position
3. It is optimal if the kerf width equals the kerf of your resaw; if the kerf is narrow, your saw won't fit. if the kerf is too wide, it lets the saw wander more.
4. A wider sawplate is desirable on the framesaw to minimize deflection; it has more beam strength
5. Length of the framesaw plate; at least twice the width of the cut you're making + 6"
6. I found the traditional design like you see in Roubo unbalanced for single person operation; there is too much weight past the beginning of the cut and the saw digs in. I added an extended handle frame to address that on my design
7. Kerfing with a traditional saw tooth pattern is not ideal; the gullets clog very quickly. A skip tooth pattern better; the plate I have has every other tooth removed. Those still clog, but not as often
8. A one-person framesaw has to be heavy enough to apply ALL the necessary downward force so it cuts without any additional downward force from the operator; you can change that with handle configurations or just add weight

If you want, I can elaborate on the points and how I came to my conclusions. My primary source of sawplate and hardware is From Blackburn Tools.
These are excellent points Mark. With regard to the kerfing, how deep do you recommend? It must be more than just a sightline, right, I mean if you expect the kerf to help the saw track there must be some depth to it. Thanks

[Mark AJ Allen]

I have built my kerfing plane to give a 3/4"-1" depth ... it's enough to hold the saw upright in the kerf square to the surface. I tried deeper but I didn't like feeling/geometry;

[Steve Voigt]

If you want, I can elaborate on the points and how I came to my conclusions. My primary source of sawplate and hardware is From Blackburn Tools.

Great points in your post above Mark; I'd love to hear you elaborate on any or all of it. I'd also love to see some pictures if you feel like it.

I recently had the good fortune to see Don Williams' workshop. He had a couple of original 19th c. veneer saws. One looked just like the Roubo illustrations, the other had short turned handles. I haven't seen any of the modern makers do that, but it makes sense to me. Both saws had very wide plates. As you suggest in (4) above, that's important; I suspect the main problem Adam (and others) had was caused by using a narrow 2" blade. I guess it is possible to get a blade like that to work, but it requires a great deal of skill. It seems like folks using 4" plates have more success.

[Warren Mickley]

sted this picture earlier in this thread.
335733
As I mentioned when I posted, this drawing was from Roubo, not Diderot. Andre Roubo was a woodworker, not a philosopher. When I first saw this plate in 1973 I thought the engraver was more used to drawing dancers than woodworkers. However, over the years I have come to think that craftsmen in 1760 actually carried themselves quite differently than today and that they might actually have looked like this. And in fact I now realize that this is one of the plates that Andre Roubo, master woodworker, engraved himself, which I think adds a lot to the accuracy. It is not an "artist's interpretation", it is a woodworkers interpretation.

Here is a plate from Diderot showing a veneer saw being used by ebenistes.
335735

And lest somebody else suggests that the "shops in Diderot are depicted spotlessly clean", here is Diderot's plate of a furniture shop, menuisier en meubles, showing enough shavings and furniture pieces lying around to give some genuine flavor.
335737

I tried putting a preminary kerf around boards to be resawed for some time around 20 years ago. I am kind of foggy about it, but I felt that it was not effective in either saving time or increasing accuracy. In any case I don't think it is a historical method. And in general I am suspicious when someone tries a historical method and reports that it does not work very well. Like some guy fooling in his basement is going to find a better way than the serious 18th century craftsmen.

[Kirby Krieger]

I'd love to hear you elaborate on any or all of it. I'd also love to see some pictures if you feel like it.

Me too :) . Thanks Mark AJ Allen (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/member.php?80683-Mark-AJ-Allen) for your informed, informative post.

[Mel Fulks]

To Warren's comment on the way the workmen in the drawings carried themselves , some of that was from the clothing. I have a friend who has a small collection of clothing from first half of the 18th century. The coats are made so that the shoulders have to be held back to an unnatural degree. The sleeves have more bend it them than modern examples. People affected a public look quite different from passers by today. Might be that the workmen didn't own clothing as nice as the drawings show and were given some good stuff ,in the DRAWINGS for their cooperation.

[Mark AJ Allen]

I love the discussion here; I do lots of resawing and have built all sorts of framesaws and kerfing planes to optimize my resawing technique. I think I'm getting to my really happy place with my experimentation. I could write an essay on the topic but there are some things I would like to add here:

1. Resawing with a frame saw is much more accurate than a hand saw; the plate deflects less because it's under tension
2. Resawing with a pre-established kerf is easier and allows you to correct for deflection easier with a low angle position
3. It is optimal if the kerf width equals the kerf of your resaw; if the kerf is narrow, your saw won't fit. if the kerf is too wide, it lets the saw wander more.
4. A wider sawplate is desirable on the framesaw to minimize deflection; it has more beam strength
5. Length of the framesaw plate; at least twice the width of the cut you're making + 6"
6. I found the traditional design like you see in Roubo unbalanced for single person operation; there is too much weight past the beginning of the cut and the saw digs in. I added an extended handle frame to address that on my design
7. Kerfing with a traditional saw tooth pattern is not ideal; the gullets clog very quickly. A skip tooth pattern better; the plate I have has every other tooth removed. Those still clog, but not as often
8. A one-person framesaw has to be heavy enough to apply ALL the necessary downward force so it cuts without any additional downward force from the operator; you can change that with handle configurations or just add weight

If you want, I can elaborate on the points and how I came to my conclusions. My primary source of sawplate and hardware is From Blackburn Tools.

Seems more interest in how I came to these conclusions . One thing to establish; when I refer to 'good' resawing, I'm talking about minimal deflection from the intended sawing plane; poor resaw require some cleanup with a scrub plane while a good resaw, I can go right to smoothing. Speed is not a factor to me; it takes me about 1 hour to resaw a 10" wide cherry board that's 7' long.

1. As best as I could, maintained the same conditions and did 'resaw-off' experiment using a 3 TPI 28" handsaw and my frame saw on opposite ends of the board. Rip saw was not as good a resaw as the framesaw. No pictures of the results
2. This is one is self evident to me; just as you scribe a line and chisel out a small groove to start a tenon or a dado, the kerf is your starting point. You don't NEED it, but it significantly aids the user's ability to cut straight, to the line. This is only more important because the number of strokes to make a cut is orders of magnitude than a tenon or dado. My practical experience to arrive at this conclusion is attempting to resaw a board without a kerf, then with a kerf; even if you manage to start your cuts without the kerf, the effect of the tension in the wood will affect the deflection of the saw. In otherwords, only in the most straight grained pieces allow you to get away with 'good resawing' without a kerf or a framesaw.
3. I think that is self explanatory. if I can't fit my saw in the kerf, it's useless for guiding my saw. the wide kerf is a little elusive. Back to the scribe line for tenons The groove is intended to guide the saw in the cut, square to the board face and perpendicular to the board edge ... 2 dimensions. if your groove is too wide, it doesn't do that as well. Same with the kerf. If you try to kerf with a plow plane or a table saw, it helps, but there is still lots of potential for slop. Ideal is to have the kerf = resaw width.
4. This is why resawing blades for bandsaws are wider than ripping ones. If the beam strength is higher, the beam is less likely to deflect under a load between two fixed points. It probably also lends itself highly to why framesaw > handsaw for resawing.
5. This is just a practical thing; you don't want the hardware of your framesaw to be slamming on your boards. I specify width of CUT vs. width of BOARD because you aren't always cutting perpendicular to the length of the board. In fact, I recommend against that approach. I think it's best to have as much of the blade in the cut as possible for improved guidance.
6. Hard to explain without a picture of the frame saw I've made. I will add later
7. I think this one is obvious. Where do the chips go if the saw can't eject them? The cutting teeth are in the cut for a relatively long time.
8. You will tire very fast if you have to apply the downward force needed to cut. Perhaps this could be addressed with a more aggressive rake on the teeth on a lighter frame? I can't experiment on that.

[John Kananis]

We made 3 films,actually. There are films that include only ONE of the instruments being made. They are a lot more detailed concerning each instrument,since all the time is devoted to only one instrument. The violin making film is much more artistic.

Unfortunately,the individual films were never made available to the public. They are probably stashed away somewhere in the archives of the Audio Video Department

What a shame, would love to see those.