Continental Bow-saws (for joinery / general work): What Woods Were Used Historically?

[Luke Dupont]

As I needed a few more saws with different tooth profiles, I thought I would make a general purpose continental style bowsaw -- not a turning saw, but one with a blade that does turn, meant more for joinery, ripping, and crosscutting, but capable of performing many tasks.

I've got a prototype / temporary saw just made out of pine, and using a bandsaw blade, which turns on bolts with a slot and pin holes cut out. I'd like to make a nicer one soon, though.

For the blade, I've made bowsaw blades before using thin spring steel sheet. The most challenging thing is simply finding where to buy appropriately thicknessed, tempered spring-steel. But for now, my question is on the frame:

In the past, I made a one from Red Oak, but that one was a bit heavy and unwieldy.

What woods were generally used to make framed saws for joinery and general work across continental Europe? It seems to me that, though heavier hard woods like Beech were generally used for most tools, lighter woods would be preferable for such large saws, particularly those with turning blades that are often held at an angle to the cut. Am I wrong though? Were most continental bowsaws made from heavier woods?

I'm curious if anyone knows what was the convention Historically, or has examined enough antique saws to know. I've never actually held an antique example, so I can only guess how they're supposed to feel in the hand.

[Luke Dupont]

Doing a bit more research, I found a discussion in which it was mentioned that light-weight woods such as spruce were often used for the stretcher, and harder woods for the body.
Maybe I'll use pine or some other softwood for the stretcher, and some Ash or Walnut that I have for the vertical pieces and handles...

[Jason Buresh]

https://www.fine-tools.com/gestell.html

ECE still makes and sells this style of saw. It says red beech for the arms and limewood for a stretcher. Gramercy also makes a bow say from hickory, which would be much easier to source

[Jack Dover]

Mine are beech for uprights and hands and basswood for stretchers, all these saws were made in Germany. I have one saw from Denmark (I think), it uses spruce for a stretcher.

I've never seen a frame saw made from other materials, although any hardwood that's stiff enough would work. I think that beech is used because it dominates the forests there, not because it has some physical properties.

[Mike Allen1010]

If you’re using your bow saws primarily for joinery, no need to rotate the blade relative to the handles. Simply the depth of cut governed by the stretcher should allow for most joinery. This makes total weight of the saw less relevant.

For what it’s worth, I made and used number of bow saws for joinery, sourcing the blades from German firm. They worked well ( especially for dovetails in very thick stock, like timber framing), but ultimately most furniture/realistic scale work I found traditional backed, joinery size were easier/more accurate to use.

Cheers, Mike

[Luke Dupont]

If you’re using your bow saws primarily for joinery, no need to rotate the blade relative to the handles. Simply the depth of cut governed by the stretcher should allow for most joinery. This makes total weight of the saw less relevant.

For what it’s worth, I made and used number of bow saws for joinery, sourcing the blades from German firm. They worked well ( especially for dovetails in very thick stock, like timber framing), but ultimately most furniture/realistic scale work I found traditional backed, joinery size were easier/more accurate to use.

Cheers, Mike

Actually, I already have joinery saws -- both a nice western tenon saw, and a Japanese Douzuki. Ryoba are great for tenons and joinery as well.

What I needed, and why I'm making bow saws, is because I don't have any panel saws capable of breaking down large stock.

I tried ripping some 4/4 Ash/Tamo with a few Ryoba that I have, and they just weren't cutting it -- pun intended. So I knocked up a quick and dirty frame saw using pine and a bandsaw blade and some bolts to allow it to turn, ala Chinese frame saws, and the speed and efficiency of that thing is impressive. It's really like a mini, hand-held bandsaw.

So, basically, I'm most interested in them for ripping and crosscutting. I used one that I made in the past to that effect and it worked great. But also they're wonderfully versatile in that you can just pop in a different blade, and get a different saw. I'll likely make coarse and fine blades for both rip and crosscut, and also get a 1/4" bandsaw blade for turning. And if I feel like it, I'll make a peg-toothed crosscut saw for bucking wood when I'm camping/bushcrafting. The blades can then be swapped out between different frames for different jobs; ie, the bucksaw or joinery saws (if I use them for joinery, which I surely will on occasion just for fun) don't need a rotating blade, etc.

This is much more economical and actually space efficient for me, compared to trying to buy vintage panel saws and pay exorbitant shipping to Japan for each and every one, and the blades themselves hardly take up any space, so I can have many blades and just a few frames to pop them in/out of as I need. Though, I do love western panel saws.

[Tony Wilkins]

Out of curiosity, what size ryoba were you using? My 300mm is a beast when it comes to breaking down stock.

[Luke Dupont]

Out of curiosity, what size ryoba were you using? My 300mm is a beast when it comes to breaking down stock.


Is that measured from the handle, or just the teeth?

From the handle, my Ryoba measures 260mm. The teeth themselves are about 210mm.

I've used many different Ryoba, and love them. But I do find that the teeth are generally better suited for softwoods than hardwoods, and they're difficult to do long rips with. Teeth that cut on the push stroke and have less acute rake are much easier for ripping I find, and cause less vibration as well (because if you are cutting with the board below you, the teeth are going with the grain on the push stroke as opposed to against, and the work is supported by the bench or saw horse as opposed to being lifted up and away from it).

The kerf on the back of the Ryoba can also be problematic for long rip cuts, especially as the set wears on one side more than. You're still contending with more binding and interference regardless though.

The wide blade on Ryoba are absolutely wonderful for accurate cuts though. I love using them for joinery for that reason.

Bow saws are challenging to rip with for some people, but I think that is primarily due to two things:
1. Blades that are too wide. If you look at vintage saws, tons of them have blades that are no more than 5/8" or 3/4". This allows you to make minor adjustments in a long rip cut.
2. Handles that are too lose and turn of their own accord, making it impossible to correct the saw in a deep/long cut. Combined with a wide blade that exacts more leverage on already loose handles, the problem of the blade turning freely is enhanced even more.

Of course, wide blades are great for joinery, though.

[Tony Wilkins]

Think it’s just the blade but I’m not completely certain. I’ve heard the softwood v hardwood but haven’t noticed it but I mostly use walnut and cherry.

[Luke Dupont]

Think it’s just the blade but I’m not completely certain. I’ve heard the softwood v hardwood but haven’t noticed it but I mostly use walnut and cherry.

Hmm, it could definitely be that there are better Ryoba out there that are more suited to hardwoods. The ones I'm using are not terribly expensive, and may be a bit thicker than necessary.

[Jack Dover]

but ultimately most furniture/realistic scale work I found traditional backed, joinery size were easier/more accurate to use.


A traditional continental tool set contains a back saw specifically for critical joinery like dovetails or tenon shoulders, usually a gent's saw, a misleading name really. A frame saw would be used for tenons or less critical parts that aren't visible. A frame saw is a medium to coarse tool, and most blades provided today aren't as fine as backsaws. Maybe a custom blade could be made to order, I'm still entertaining this idea.

Another interesting thing is that during XX century an offset back saw was the norm, at least in the Northern parts of Europe. I've lost mine and can't find a good one. Crown Tools still manufacture one, but they threat it as a trimming saw, so it's filed cross-cut and it seems they have some manufacturing issues: there was a bow in the spine, I've sent for a replacement, a replacement came in bowed too.

[Jack Dover]

I tried ripping some 4/4 Ash/Tamo with a few Ryoba that I have, and they just weren't cutting it -- pun intended.

Yeah, that's to be expected. Ryoba is a joinery saw and it has a limitation on the length of cut: once the other side teeth are getting into a kerf - you're done. Also, your ryoba might be for small scale work, they differ in size and aggressiveness.

For breaking down medium sized boards a kataba is used. But for the 4/4 you really want a maebiki, which will do a quick job of your timber, but you will depend on a saw smith for setup, sharpening and maintenance. They're very, very special beasts.

EDIT: apparently I can't read. For 4/4 a kataba is okay, I was thinking about 8/4 or thicker while typing.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

After watching a video of Peter Sellers build a simple bow saw I have always wanted to build one myself just because it would be cool / fun to do. If you have time please document the process and post here. Interested in the wood you use, the style, the hardware, etc.

[Jack Dover]

From the handle, my Ryoba measures 260mm. The teeth themselves are about 210mm.


Yeah, that's a small scale joinery saw.


I've used many different Ryoba, and love them. But I do find that the teeth are generally better suited for softwoods than hardwoods, and they're difficult to do long rips with.

It's because all mass-manufactured disposable blades are assumed for softwoods. There are saws specifically for Western hardwoods, they're forged by a smith and the price can be mistaken for a a price of Boeing 747. They're also not for a beginner, people snap them in half all the time.


I find, and cause less vibration as well

Pretty sure this is your technique. Most people that learned the craft themselves use wrong technique and others copy it. If you put your piece in vises upright and start sawing down at 90˚ - not only it will vibrate like crazy, you are also risking of breaking some teeth off. Same applies to cross-cutting flat on a workbench. What's funny is the proper technique is described in excruciating details everywhere including the packaging a saw came in. Yet people just ignore it. It's not a stab at you personally, just an observation.


1. Blades that are too wide. If you look at vintage saws, tons of them have blades that are no more than 5/8" or 3/4". This allows you to make minor adjustments in a long rip cut.


These are just worn blades. Or some special purpose blades, like firewood cutting, bucking or scroll cutting. A joinery blade starts its life 40mm wide, 12-15 tpi, a ripping blade was 35mm, 8-10tpi. Or at least they used to, afaik none of the modern day suppliers offer such blades.


2. Handles that are too lose and turn of their own accord, making it impossible to correct the saw in a deep/long cut.


Again, just a worn down saw. The tenons are supposed to be conical, they lock down dead once a string is tightened. Over years of adjustment and turning these tenons wear down - friction, blade holders reaming, etc. Also there were supposed to be thick leather washers, esp. on later models where tenons were straight (for no good reason). Leather hardens over years and crumbles away. There used to be repair sets sold separately: two handles with slightly thicker tenons, 4 leather washers and a new string. I guess today the first thing in restoration should be turning new handles at least.

Another issue is the stretcher. It compresses over years, can be worn down so much you can't tighten it at all. It was also assumed to be disposable and bridle style joint was preferable. I like a stretcher with through mortises because it's easier to replace: just rip a length of a 4/4 board and drill out two mortises.

And, by the way, you are not supposed to correct the saw in a long cut (or any other cut), the expectation is that you must just saw straight. The explanation was that it takes too much time to correct a wavy cut, therefore it was even a part of examination. No idea whether it's true about the exam, never did it and at that time ripping was already done by a machine.

[Jack Dover]

After watching a video of Peter Sellers build a simple bow saw

He has actually build a buck saw, a type used for felling trees, just scaled down. The issue is the fixed blade: kerfs in the uprights must be absolutely co-planar and in one plane, also the uprights might be absolutely in the same plane. That's not always possible even with the machine, given it is wood under tension. I'm pretty sure there's a minutiae twist in a blade and with no possibility to compensate it will at least have a wide kerf and ragged entry and exit arrises. Afaik Paul never used that saw as a daily tool after the build. Also that hand protector, omg, I wonder where that came from.

If you really want to build a continental frame saw I recommend Isaac Smith's (of Blackburn Tools) video. He also offers a blade way better than a metal bandsaw blade.

[Luke Dupont]

Yeah, that's a small scale joinery saw.



It's because all mass-manufactured disposable blades are assumed for softwoods. There are saws specifically for Western hardwoods, they're forged by a smith and the price can be mistaken for a a price of Boeing 747. They're also not for a beginner, people snap them in half all the time.



Pretty sure this is your technique. Most people that learned the craft themselves use wrong technique and others copy it. If you put your piece in vises upright and start sawing down at 90˚ - not only it will vibrate like crazy, you are also risking of breaking some teeth off. Same applies to cross-cutting flat on a workbench. What's funny is the proper technique is described in excruciating details everywhere including the packaging a saw came in. Yet people just ignore it. It's not a stab at you personally, just an observation.



These are just worn blades. Or some special purpose blades, like firewood cutting, bucking or scroll cutting. A joinery blade starts its life 40mm wide, 12-15 tpi, a ripping blade was 35mm, 8-10tpi. Or at least they used to, afaik none of the modern day suppliers offer such blades.



Again, just a worn down saw. The tenons are supposed to be conical, they lock down dead once a string is tightened. Over years of adjustment and turning these tenons wear down - friction, blade holders reaming, etc. Also there were supposed to be thick leather washers, esp. on later models where tenons were straight (for no good reason). Leather hardens over years and crumbles away. There used to be repair sets sold separately: two handles with slightly thicker tenons, 4 leather washers and a new string. I guess today the first thing in restoration should be turning new handles at least.

Another issue is the stretcher. It compresses over years, can be worn down so much you can't tighten it at all. It was also assumed to be disposable and bridle style joint was preferable. I like a stretcher with through mortises because it's easier to replace: just rip a length of a 4/4 board and drill out two mortises.

And, by the way, you are not supposed to correct the saw in a long cut (or any other cut), the expectation is that you must just saw straight. The explanation was that it takes too much time to correct a wavy cut, therefore it was even a part of examination. No idea whether it's true about the exam, never did it and at that time ripping was already done by a machine.


Interesting. A few questions:

1. What's the correct technique for ripping and crosscutting with a Ryoba that is mentioned on the packaging of cheap saws? I do not have a habit of keeping such packaging nor do I recall instructions coming with it...

2. With regards to blade width, I have to actually argue with you here, because I can point you to any number of saws on ebay right now which prove otherwise. It is easy to tell the original width of the blade because they only wear down from one side (the teeth), and many are even sharpened (poorly?) such that only the teeth in the middle of the saw are sharpened and the teeth on the ends are left untouched, resulting in an arking toothline.

It's good to know that the tenons (for the handles) are supposed to be conical. This is exactly what I'm doing with the saw I'm building now.
My experience of saws that have poorly locking blades is with those made to turn on metal pins / bolts, as is common with Chinese framesaws, but also employed often on European saws, as is evidenced by vintage examples one can find of home made saws, and saws found in old manuscripts. These do not have a tapered pin, and if the fit isn't snug enough, and the metal is not roughened up and left smooth, they can and will turn on you, even when brand new.

[Luke Dupont]

He has actually build a buck saw, a type used for felling trees, just scaled down. The issue is the fixed blade: kerfs in the uprights must be absolutely co-planar and in one plane, also the uprights might be absolutely in the same plane. That's not always possible even with the machine, given it is wood under tension. I'm pretty sure there's a minutiae twist in a blade and with no possibility to compensate it will at least have a wide kerf and ragged entry and exit arrises. Afaik Paul never used that saw as a daily tool after the build. Also that hand protector, omg, I wonder where that came from.

If you really want to build a continental frame saw I recommend Isaac Smith's (of Blackburn Tools) video. He also offers a blade way better than a metal bandsaw blade.

Joinery saws with fixed blades were in common use. There are many, many examples of this. They're not just for buck saws. They typically have thinner blades and fine, rip-cut teeth, as you would expect for a joinery saw.
I agree that metal bandsaw blades are not ideal though. I'll check out your recommendation, though I was thinking I will make all of my own blades myself.

[steven c newman]

The one I made several years ago...uses Maple for both the uprights and the stretcher..
472586
472587
18" long blade was from a Butcher's Meat saw...tension is by all-thread rod.
472588
Seems to be a 9ppi? Works quite well as a crosscut...haven't tried it as a rip

Made after watching the videos from China, by GE HONG....he used a watch spring for his blade.. In the video, you'll see all sizes hanging up on the walls of his shop...might have been 50...

Traditional Chinese Woodworking...Frame Saw.
My stretcher sits in a loose M&T joint on each end...his was more of a bridal joint, where the stretcher wraps around the uprights.
Black tape on the handle is more for grip. This saw cuts on the push stroke.

[Jack Dover]

Interesting. A few questions:
1. What's the correct technique for ripping and crosscutting with a Ryoba that is mentioned on the packaging of cheap saws? I do not have a habit of keeping such packaging nor do I recall instructions coming with it...


It's all about angles. I don't have packaging around, but I searched for some pictures on internet:

Here's a wrong way:

472993

The picture title says "dozuki", however this is not the right type of saw, the right type would be a hozohiki. The position is not correct either, this position causes vibration (unless a piece is almost squashed) and subjects a saw to a risk of losing teeth, even in softwoods.


472994

Same here, this is a cover image of a video by one very, very popular YT woodworking celebrity. There's obviously a typo here, the title should read "incorrectly". Despite his grip being somewhat close to a correct grip, the piece held upright is wrong and causes same issues as the previous picture. The piece should lay flat on the bench actually.


472995

Same. Obviously photoshopped, still the piece should lay flat on the bench. A correct sawing technique does not require work holding at all, except maybe a hand put over the piece. Not pressing down hard, but just the weight of your non-dominant hand is sufficient. Sometimes a clamp is used, esp. when sawing on sawhorses - because there's no stop. But small pieces don't really require a stop. The only exception I can think is long rips in panels sawn on a floor. Probably because it's hard to get under the piece akin to a sawyer breaking a log, a craftsman puts a foot on a panel and leans on it. Heavy beams are more forgiving too, a sheer weight of a long beam absorbs all the vibration, so we can save lots of handling by sawing with a handle being high. But the angle between a saw and a beam is still low nevertheless.

And here's Will Beemer (of Heartwood School fame and the founding father of the North American Timberframers Guild) demonstrates a correct technique using a ryoba. Please note that Will have also chosen the right tool for the job, a ryoba is a carpenter's joinery saw:


472997

There are images and videos that demonstrate correct technique, it's just people ignore these. There's quite a number of Japanese carpenter's videos. They don't explain anything but you can watch and observe how they position themselves and their saws.

The traditional technique seems awkward at first, but only because of our implicit assumptions. Soon you will get used to it and the "regular" way will feel clumsy and quite uncomfortable, the feeling of a saw will get different — smooth, steady and fast, the cut surface will be perfect, almost finish quality, and most importantly the saw will track, you will never have to correct it while in a cut.

It's also very simple. I think I made it more confusing with my explanations, but simplest things are hardest to explain.



2. With regards to blade width, I have to actually argue with you here, because I can point you to any number of saws on ebay right now which prove otherwise. It is easy to tell the original width of the blade because they only wear down from one side (the teeth), and many are even sharpened (poorly?) such that only the teeth in the middle of the saw are sharpened and the teeth on the ends are left untouched, resulting in an arking toothline.


One thing to keep in mind that not every frame saw was a joinery saw. Framesaws were ubiquitous there, handled saws become dominant maybe a few decades ago. Their purpose was mostly rough crosscutting (because of obvious limitations of a frame saw when cross-cutting). Often, esp. in rural areas, only a frame was sold, and a blade would be sourced locally (also just look at the variety of blades in merchant catalogs, I once counted 15 different types in a single catalog, for all kinds of work). These blades could have been anything, any width, length and TPI. That's why so many of them snap today: they're low quality and work hardened. So by just looking at the picture of a frame saw one shouldn't conclude it was used for joinery or furniture.

Also, since joinery saws had wide blades, sometimes close to 2", and with small teeth it was very, very unlikely you could sink a teeth line below pin holes in your lifetime. A joiner or a cabinetmaker would joint teeth and if anything a blade would get replaced. The "arking" tooth line is a tell tale that a saw wasn't living in a furniture workshop and was filed by an inexperienced worker (or rather it didn't matter to them because sawing green firewood isn't as demanding). Of course you could do joinery with it, but a cabinetmaker would let teeth sink on a frame saw no more than you would let it on a Western back saw - not at all.



also employed often on European saws, as is evidenced by vintage examples one can find of home made saws, and saws found in old manuscripts. These do not have a tapered pin, and if the fit isn't snug enough, and the metal is not roughened up and left smooth, they can and will turn on you, even when brand new.

I personally seen bolts (or rather a steel rod) used only on felling or bucking saws, when a blade wasn't fixed to uprights. Not familiar with Chinese frame saws, but I don't think they have anything to do with Western continental saws, the ones I've seen were special purpose tools with a very particular construction suited to needs of Chinese craftsmen. The ones I've seen had an L shaped rod mortised into upright at one end of the blade - that won't turn on you ever, the other end was fastened to its upright at an angle.

I would also caution you about manuscripts, sometimes their authors had but a vague idea what are they writing about. The prime example is Moxon, who has copied pretty much the whole book from earlier authors and compiled missing parts from other trades. E.g. joiners chapter on mortising is copied from the carpentry chapter, a well known fact. His tools illustrations are quite ambiguous too.

[Luke Dupont]

It's all about angles. I don't have packaging around, but I searched for some pictures on internet:

Here's a wrong way:

472993

The picture title says "dozuki", however this is not the right type of saw, the right type would be a hozohiki. The position is not correct either, this position causes vibration (unless a piece is almost squashed) and subjects a saw to a risk of losing teeth, even in softwoods.


472994

Same here, this is a cover image of a video by one very, very popular YT woodworking celebrity. There's obviously a typo here, the title should read "incorrectly". Despite his grip being somewhat close to a correct grip, the piece held upright is wrong and causes same issues as the previous picture. The piece should lay flat on the bench actually.


472995

Same. Obviously photoshopped, still the piece should lay flat on the bench. A correct sawing technique does not require work holding at all, except maybe a hand put over the piece. Not pressing down hard, but just the weight of your non-dominant hand is sufficient. Sometimes a clamp is used, esp. when sawing on sawhorses - because there's no stop. But small pieces don't really require a stop. The only exception I can think is long rips in panels sawn on a floor. Probably because it's hard to get under the piece akin to a sawyer breaking a log, a craftsman puts a foot on a panel and leans on it. Heavy beams are more forgiving too, a sheer weight of a long beam absorbs all the vibration, so we can save lots of handling by sawing with a handle being high. But the angle between a saw and a beam is still low nevertheless.

And here's Will Beemer (of Heartwood School fame and the founding father of the North American Timberframers Guild) demonstrates a correct technique using a ryoba. Please note that Will have also chosen the right tool for the job, a ryoba is a carpenter's joinery saw:


472997

There are images and videos that demonstrate correct technique, it's just people ignore these. There's quite a number of Japanese carpenter's videos. They don't explain anything but you can watch and observe how they position themselves and their saws.

The traditional technique seems awkward at first, but only because of our implicit assumptions. Soon you will get used to it and the "regular" way will feel clumsy and quite uncomfortable, the feeling of a saw will get different — smooth, steady and fast, the cut surface will be perfect, almost finish quality, and most importantly the saw will track, you will never have to correct it while in a cut.

It's also very simple. I think I made it more confusing with my explanations, but simplest things are hardest to explain.



One thing to keep in mind that not every frame saw was a joinery saw. Framesaws were ubiquitous there, handled saws become dominant maybe a few decades ago. Their purpose was mostly rough crosscutting (because of obvious limitations of a frame saw when cross-cutting). Often, esp. in rural areas, only a frame was sold, and a blade would be sourced locally (also just look at the variety of blades in merchant catalogs, I once counted 15 different types in a single catalog, for all kinds of work). These blades could have been anything, any width, length and TPI. That's why so many of them snap today: they're low quality and work hardened. So by just looking at the picture of a frame saw one shouldn't conclude it was used for joinery or furniture.

Also, since joinery saws had wide blades, sometimes close to 2", and with small teeth it was very, very unlikely you could sink a teeth line below pin holes in your lifetime. A joiner or a cabinetmaker would joint teeth and if anything a blade would get replaced. The "arking" tooth line is a tell tale that a saw wasn't living in a furniture workshop and was filed by an inexperienced worker (or rather it didn't matter to them because sawing green firewood isn't as demanding). Of course you could do joinery with it, but a cabinetmaker would let teeth sink on a frame saw no more than you would let it on a Western back saw - not at all.



I personally seen bolts (or rather a steel rod) used only on felling or bucking saws, when a blade wasn't fixed to uprights. Not familiar with Chinese frame saws, but I don't think they have anything to do with Western continental saws, the ones I've seen were special purpose tools with a very particular construction suited to needs of Chinese craftsmen. The ones I've seen had an L shaped rod mortised into upright at one end of the blade - that won't turn on you ever, the other end was fastened to its upright at an angle.

I would also caution you about manuscripts, sometimes their authors had but a vague idea what are they writing about. The prime example is Moxon, who has copied pretty much the whole book from earlier authors and compiled missing parts from other trades. E.g. joiners chapter on mortising is copied from the carpentry chapter, a well known fact. His tools illustrations are quite ambiguous too.


Thanks, great information.

In regards to the sawing position, the correct example that you posted is exactly how I crosscut with Japanese saws.

It's difficult to find examples of how to correctly rip with Japanese saws, however. If you use the typical western ripping position -- knee on the board, and sawing from above, you're going against the grain and also lifting the board up with every stroke, creating, often, horrible vibrations.

The only way to counteract that, which I've found, is to either to put the board up high and start the rip from the underside of the board, or rip at a perfect 90 degree angle to the work, either above, below, or otherwise parallel to it. However, ripping at 90 degrees can make it difficult to set up the saw for a long, straight rip, and keep it straight, as your blade becomes "narrower" than if you were sawing at an angle.

All of these factors just make it easier for me to rip with a Western saw, be it a panel or frame saw. So I wonder if there's a technique for ripping that I simply don't get. If I recall, Stan Covington often commented that he (and even some Japanese craftsmen) prefer Western rip saws for ripping, so maybe there are just inherent difficulties with pull saws and long rips.

Also, good point about Moxon and old manuscripts. This is also the case when I was studying Historical European Martial Arts, with some manuscripts being compiled by people who were not necessarily fencers. Still, the split bolt design is common throughout the world and even used in fine woodworking and joinery in many Asian countries and China, so I think it shouldn't be dismissed as a valid design, albeit one with potential drawbacks.

Fix bladed joinery saws are featured in Moxon, Roubo, and all sorts of medieval artwork, as well as described by modern day woodworkers in certain parts of Europe.
I am not sure how reliable the source, but I found mention of the following specs given by, presumably, a French woodwork commenting on Paul Seller's frame saw build:

"Here, in France, the most common blade size for a tenon saw is 500x40x0.35mm with 4 to 5 teeth/cm.
For the large one, multi purpose, 600 or 700x40x0.6mm with 2.5 to 3.5 teeth/cm.
Same size for the jig saw with a blade width of10 or 8mm. 3 to 4.5 teeth/cm.
All three with rip saw teeth, most of the time.
The last two are turning saws, the jig saw has handles, being mostly used vertically, the teeth facing the user."

I suppose this varies by region, though? You seem to have first hand experience though. Where are you from / have you come across various styles of frame saw? I'm just curious.

I'm making a frame saw currently with wooden handles that are tapered, as you suggest. I think I will also make one with bolts for the mount, and compare the two and see how they hold up over the years. I'm sure the tapered handles will fare better, but I'm curious to see how long the bolt mounted one remains tight. In the end, the frames are easy to replace, so there's no reason not to experiment a bit.

[Jack Dover]

All of these factors just make it easier for me to rip with a Western saw, be it a panel or frame saw. So I wonder if there's a technique for ripping that I simply don't get. If I recall, Stan Covington often commented that he (and even some Japanese craftsmen) prefer Western rip saws for ripping, so maybe there are just inherent difficulties with pull saws and long rips.


It seems you're getting it right. It's just the ryobi\kataba type of saws have their limitation in terms of thickness they can handle and how fast they cut. From what I gather, long heavy rips in thick woods are supposed to be done by a different type of a saw (various kinds of maebikis), which are less popular. A Western saw comes pretty close in aggressiveness, so I don't see why not, none of us is miya daiku, so it's okay.



Fix bladed joinery saws are featured in Moxon, Roubo, and all sorts of medieval artwork, as well as described by modern day woodworkers in certain parts of Europe.


Yeah, they do exist, it's just they're special purpose. Timberframers use fixed blades, parquetry frame saws are fixed blade, there used to be miter boxes with framesaws which had fixed blades too. I was talking in the context of joinery saws in a joinery\cabinetmaking shop — tenoning, dovetailing and such. There were dedicated rip saws too, same size, different blade.



I am not sure how reliable the source, but I found mention of the following specs given by, presumably, a French woodwork commenting on Paul Seller's frame saw build:

"Here, in France, the most common blade size for a tenon saw is 500x40x0.35mm with 4 to 5 teeth/cm.
For the large one, multi purpose, 600 or 700x40x0.6mm with 2.5 to 3.5 teeth/cm.
Same size for the jig saw with a blade width of10 or 8mm. 3 to 4.5 teeth/cm.
All three with rip saw teeth, most of the time.
The last two are turning saws, the jig saw has handles, being mostly used vertically, the teeth facing the user."

I suppose this varies by region, though?

Yeah, they do vary by region. It could depend whether you were in a secluded rural area or whether there was a good hardware vendor around, what occupation you're in and so on. Not going to comment on the "most common" part, but the TPI this guy quotes are a bit on a coarse side, but we don't know who was using those saws. Some old carpentry saws perhaps? Or maybe someone working on large pieces.


You seem to have first hand experience though. Where are you from / have you come across various styles of frame saw? I'm just curious.

Various sources, really. Had relatives graduated a trade school in Europe, have some friends from German-speaking countries and from Scandinavia. And I had a chance on multiple occasions to work under a German joiner who received training and went into workforce in late 1940-ies, right after the war.