Preferred micrometer for determining saw set?

[Ryan van Nood]

Howdy folks, I'm diving into teaching myself how to restore, sharpen, and set saws and I understand that I want to create the minimal amount of set I can get away with in order to make the smallest (and least labor intensive) kerf possible. This excellent tutorial suggests using a micrometer to determine a width 20-30% wider than the blade: https://www.vintagesaws.com/library/ftj/spring97/spring97.html

Do you folks have a preferred type of micrometer or method of determining set for a saw you've never sharpened?

Part of my question stems from being daunted by the entire world of saws, etc. I have picked up an old Disston Monarch saw set and don't really understand how it works, but I wager that I can set myself on the right direction by understanding at least what I'm shooting for thanks to the aforementioned handy article.

Cheers!

[Jim Koepke]

Mine is a dial caliper that measures down to 0.001" that wasn't too expensive on ebay.

The digital calipers seem unnecessary to me. None of my electronic devices have met the test of time like my mechanical devices have.

jtk

[Ryan van Nood]

That makes sense. I don't want a digital one either because I don't want to deal with batteries and they always have more plastic parts. I just discovered the mitutoyo 193-111, which is cool because it has mechanical digits, which has the convenient readability of a digital caliper but without the electronics. I might see look for a used one as that's rather far beyond my budget...

[Tom M King]

The minimum amount of set is not just to clear the plate, but to allow for steering the saw in the cut, and cleaning off any extra left past the line on the backstroke. I would rather have a little more than the absolute minimum. I almost never measure it, but just look and test cut. If it looks right, it usually is.

[Charles Guest]

How would one go about setting saw teeth to three or more decimal places of accuracy? If you can't, then what good is measuring it?

[Warren Mickley]

I have sharpened saws since 1974, and never used a micrometer. I never heard of a woodworker doing this.

In practice, we add set when the the saw binds too easily in the cut. If by chance we give a little too much set, it is no matter; we just don't set the saw for the next sharpening. In practice we don't set the saw every time, just when it needs it. You want your set to be in response to how the saw performs, not according to some chart.

[Tom M King]

I do the same sort of measuring that Warren does. I did measure an 8" 20 point little dovetail saw once, but don't remember any of the measurements. I just remember doing it for curiosity for that little saw but it gets used almost never anyway.

[Derek Cohen]

Ryan, I take the same approach as Warren does. What I might suggest is, if you wish to experiment, that you use Mike Wenzloff’s technique of setting the set: place a layer of paper over the set teeth and tap or squeeze the plate until the teeth penetrate the paper. The paper acts as a depth stop and so limits the amount of set. Now different paper has different thickness. I use tape to do this, and these vary in thickness as well. Measure the thickness of the paper, not the teeth. The reason for using the paper method is to even up the set.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Chuck Hill]

Here is a video illustrating what Derek is suggesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lKUsWFYbwA

If you do decide that you want a micrometer, you can find a lot of cheap ones like this:
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32838805173.html (https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32838805173.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.main.103.26 8a234O234OYT&algo_pvid=f0a2b141-fa1c-48e3-a151-253ec4001961&algo_exp_id=f0a2b141-fa1c-48e3-a151-253ec4001961-51&pdp_ext_f=%7B%22sku_id%22%3A%2265125065759%22%7D&pdp_npi=3%40dis%21CAD%2122.33%2117.65%21%21%21%21% 21%40211bf48d16801399547626807d070c%2165125065759% 21sea%21CA%213223884533&curPageLogUid=c5zAH5Jo63kE)

Most are metric, if you want imperial then digital is about the only option. I bought one before seeing that Mike Wenzloff video. That seems like a much more repeatable way to get a consistent set. You can find decent machinist's vices for a reasonable price. While not perfect they are good enough for this. You will also find ones that are rather expensive indeed.

[Ryan van Nood]

Unexpected answers are the best reason to venture asking questions. Thanks so much folks, I'll play with set and give Wenzloff's method a try for making the set even.

[Ryan van Nood]

Follow up--does using Wenzloff's method rule out sharpening before setting? What are opinions regarding the order of sharpening and setting? Perhaps that should be an independent thread.

[Charles Guest]

Follow up--does using Wenzloff's method rule out sharpening before setting? What are opinions regarding the order of sharpening and setting? Perhaps that should be an independent thread.

If you analyze this, as a pure thought exercise, you'll pretty much come to the conclusion that handsaws couldn't possibly ever work. Well, of course they do and will. Point is: don't overthink it, though it does require some thought and analysis.

Peen the set out of a cheap saw, or squeeze the set out in a machinist's vice with smooth jaws until the saw has essentially zero set (but not actually completely gone). It doesn't take much pressure and only squeeze at the toothline. It's best of you leave just enough set in so that you can tell which direction each tooth was originally bent. Never go against this direction, especially on an older saw, as the plate is often harder and therefore more brittle. Then set your saw set on its smallest setting. Then set the saw afresh. See if it'll saw to your satisfaction in a species or two of wood you're most likely to use.

If the saw needs sharpening, do it after you've set it. This exercise is best done on a saw that's already acceptably sharp. What you're trying to do is establish whether your saw set, on a minimal setting, puts too much set into a saw and if it is imparting an acceptably consistent set. If it's just a hair more set than you'd like, then side dressing the teeth a few strokes with a file could help, as it will a saw that's running to one side, but don't worry about that yet. Just go through the process I outlined and see what happens. Don't try to fix or anticipate problems you may never have.

Here's the catch and caveat to everything I just wrote, and it's sort of a biggie: you have to be an experienced sawyer to tell if any of this works exactly as it's supposed to. A benchmark in the form of saws that have been sharpened and set by somebody you're sure knows what they're doing is almost a non-negotiable. Words and pretty pictures on the internet won't do it. You need saws, in hand, with which to compare your own efforts. Becoming a saw doctor is not a cheap endeavor. You're going to invest a lot time and a fair amount of money doing so if your goal is to bring train wrecks back to life.

[Ryan van Nood]

Thank you for that sage advice, Charles. I'll get to work!

[David Carroll]

Do you folks have a preferred type of micrometer or method of determining set for a saw you've never sharpened?

Coming from a machinist's background, I have a lot of machinist's tools, including micrometers and various calipers. I agree with those who say that measuring saw set down to a thousandth of an inch is unnecessary, and overkill. But I am so used to grabbing a dial caliper and measuring stuff that I do it without thinking. I look at the dial and I instantly know the measurement, because I'm accustomed to it. Like telling the time with an analog watch. I glance at it and I know what time it is. I don't have to say "oh its 10:15." I just know it. Same way as I see the caliper scale and dial reading 0.032-inch and I know it's just over 1/32-inch.

Because I am accustomed to doing it, I do it when I am working wood. I certainly don't need to, but it's the way I am used to. If I were not used to it, I wouldn't go out and buy a dial caliper and learn to use it, just for this use. So my recommendation is to use Mike Wenzloff's paper trick (though he is not correct in his assertion that paper doesn't compress. It's an open matrix of cellulose fibers, it compresses. But it compresses consistently, so even if it compresses by 25% (it doesn't) with a thickness of +/- 0.003-inches to start, we're still left with 2-1/4" thou, or just under 0.005" for total set.

Still, I think that owning precision measuring equipment not a bad idea for other reasons, for general shop use I would use a dial caliper instead of a micrometer. I find them much handier in general. They can be used as a depth gauge, for measuring holes, and for measuring drill bits, once you've buggered the shaft and can't read the marking on the butt end any more. Dial calipers are not expensive anymore, unless you buy Starrett or any of the other premium makes. I find them a valuable tool. Micrometers are good yes, but in a limited thickness range. There is a learning curve to get the pressure just right, unless you get a ratcheting micrometer. For measuring something like saw teeth it's fiddley because the mic's anvil is small and you cant really measure a broad area, like you can with a dial caliper.

I'd steer clear of Vernier calipers, unless you really want to learn how to read them. Not difficult, but takes some getting used to.

Good luck!

DC

[Jim Koepke]

Ryan, Charles describes a process that in many cases is much more work than necessary.

Pete Taran has a great tutorial on saw sharpening that you have already found at Vintage Saws dot com. Pete knows saws and is a well known source in the world of woodworking saws.

Many saws found in the wild already have plenty of set. For me it has always been easier to start by filing and setting afterward if the saw binds while cutting.

There are a multitude of saw sets floating around. Some are made for large teeth and some for small teeth. Some are made to work a wide range of teeth.

jtk

[Edward Weber]

Some people follow threads like these (not posting) and this is not at all helpful.
Why not say where your opinions differ? Is that too much to ask.

Personally I would set before I sharpen but no need to call anyone names.

[steven c newman]

Gauge I use for saw set? Hmmm...that would be my left thumb and left index finger.....along with whether the saw binds in a cut...

One of the great mysteries in life..what do all them numbers mean on the set's anvil.....

J.A.S.T. with the usual "stuff"....

[Jim Koepke]

Gauge I use for saw set? Hmmm...that would be my left thumb and left index finger.....along with whether the saw binds in a cut...

One of the great mysteries in life..what do all them numbers mean on the set's anvil.....

J.A.S.T. with the usual "stuff"....

Everyone has their own way that has become useful from their experience.

My tendency is to give the saw a test. If it binds, it needs more set. If it cuts fine, there is no problem with the set. If it rattles and wanders, it needs attention.

A notebook and a caliper can help solve some of "the great mysteries of life… "

The last few times one of my saws was sharpened notes were made as to the setting of the saw set and the measurement of the teeth's set. Do this enough with the same saw set and it will allow one to have a rough guide as an answer to "the great mysteries of life… "

If you have a decent set of feeler gauges this can be done quite simply. Use the feeler gauges to measure the kerf left in the wood after some practice cuts. This may read different than a caliper on the saw. However, it will read the result of the set.

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

I have a small collection of backsaws for joinery, which comprise both saws for dovetails, tenons and crosscutting. In all, I have around 6 or 7 dovetail saws, of which only one or two have their original sharpening. I have been sharpening my own saws for quite a few years now.

What I find is that, as much as I attempt to duplicate a tooth shape and set when i find one that I like, the saws can feel different from one another according to the wood being sawn. I may begin dovetailing with one saw, and swap it out as it just does not work as smoothly for that particular board. The reason is that the geometry of the teeth may be slightly different, or the amount of set may be fractionally different. I do not use machines to ensure that geometry is identical. Plus, I use a very fine diamond plate to swipe the sides of the teeth post setting and sharpening to ensure there are no stragglers. This will alter the set for each saw.

What I am getting at is that playing around with geometry and set is interesting and fun, but it is unlikely that an amateur is going to notice the difference of one saw against another, where they attempt to vary just the set - there are too many other variables in play.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[James Pallas]

You can also use pieces of feeler gauge on the saw set itself to get an estimate of the set. Still experience is the best teacher. It is a little difficult to accurately use a mic on the points of teeth. Derek’s tape or paper and flat vice jaws is a good way to be accurate on many teeth at once and get both sides.
Jim

[Scott Winners]

I will chime in as one of the micrometer adopters.

I have about 15 'restored' vintage handsaws. What I have found in local second stores is the old saws I can buy consistently have too much set. I am also finding the saws I do buy have rust spots along the gum line where each tooth meets the plate.

So really my 'restored' saws have been de-rusted and sharpened and are back into service, but my ability to change the set is very limited secondary to breaking teeth off. I hope in the fullness of time to use some of them enough to resharpen them enough to file down past the rust pits and be able to dial in the set I want. Also, as I file away the teeth each sharpening, the total remaining set is getting smaller.

On the three vintage saw sets I own, setting the set to, for instance "8," and then adjusting all the teeth on an 8 point crosscut saw gives me too much set. It was this finding exactly that lead me to reach for my micrometer. As I already reload my own ammunition for my target rifle, I reached for my reloading equipment.

I have a throwaway digital caliper, and have a set of anvils for the micrometer made by Hornady. The technical name is bullet comparator, it is an anvil set for micrometer that can be use to measure from the primer end of a loaded round, to the ogive point on the curve of the bullet nose. This is real handy to know when trying to reach much past 150 meters or so, jump in this situation is how far the bullet moves forward before the ogive point on the bullet nose engages with the rifling in the barrel. Blah blah blah. At the saw sharpening bench the Hornady system (2 sets) gives me a pair of anvil faces about half inch diameter each so I can span a few tooth tips when measuring width of kerf. I just did a quick search, the Hornady "comparator body" is available as a single stand alone item from that big online place named after a river. So one complete set with 7 inserts and 1 spare second body, you are ready to go, but I am sure there are easier (and likely less expensive ways) to get there.

Smoothness of cut is dependent (partly) on uniformity of set. If you got some snaggle teeth in the otherwise uniformly set teeth you will have some unsightly gouges to manage on your freshly cut faces. Too much set gets me a wiggly plate and makes it challenging to cut a straight line. Not enough set is hard to steer and prone to binding in the cut.

I will say the vintage saws I have purchased generally have a tooth set that works pretty good for timber framing size joinery in green softwoods. But for kiln dried hickory and kiln dried white oak, way too much set. For kiln dried Doug Fir, too much set but not way too much.

If I ever buy a NIB 8 point crosscut saw from LV or LN I would expect to find something like 0.012 to 0.015 inches total set on the teeth with my home gear, and I would expect the saw to work very well in kiln dried hardwood, and I would probably have to set the dials on my vintage sets to something like 10-11-12 to duplicate the angle.

The plates of vintage saws are (can be) heartbreaking rust buckets, but the handles, the totes on the golden age Disstons feel so natural in my hand I just cannot give up on them. If LV ever makes a 24-28inch 8 point crosscut saw I sincerely and earnestly hope they shape the plate to accept totes off Golden Age Disston. That would be an awesome handsaw.

[Robert Hazelwood]

A dial or digital caliper is fine to measure this, and I would recommend you get one even if you never use it to check a saw. IMO a micrometer is overkill and would probably be harder and slower to use.

You certainly don't need them to set a saw but it can help you establish a baseline to compare with.

[Jim Koepke]

A dial or digital caliper is fine to measure this, and I would recommend you get one even if you never use it to check a saw. IMO a micrometer is overkill and would probably be harder and slower to use.

You certainly don't need them to set a saw but it can help you establish a baseline to compare with.

+1 on what Robert posted. Even if you do not use it in saw sharpening it is a handy tool to have in the shop. Even an inexpensive one like this:

498740

With a good eye (maybe aided by a magnifying glass) the 1/64 scale can help to extrapolate values down to 0.007 or less. This one is used often to check screws, bolts, drill bits and any other item that my curiosity wants to measure. It is often used to compare dimensions on stock headed for the lathe.

As others have said, you really can get along without one. When you have one, it comes in quite handy.

This little caliper stays in a toolbox drawer with a bunch of loose and/or odd ball drill bits:

498741

It is a bit funky, but it does come in handy when going through my unindexed bits.

jtk

[William Fretwell]

As an exercise I sharpened 5 old rip saws, used a saw set and saw vise the same. Without a doubt the beauty of the restored saws added bias to which I thought would cut the best.
They were totally different, cutting the same piece of wood! The ugliest one was by far the best at cutting.
Makes you re-examine your sharpening technique, a lengthy process, adding 5 degree pitch etc.
When you have some spare time give it a go!

[Derek Cohen]

As an exercise I sharpened 5 old rip saws, used a saw set and saw vise the same. Without a doubt the beauty of the restored saws added bias to which I thought would cut the best.
They were totally different, cutting the same piece of wood! The ugliest one was by far the best at cutting.
Makes you re-examine your sharpening technique, a lengthy process, adding 5 degree pitch etc.
When you have some spare time give it a go!

That's what I said earlier. Good to hear you found the same.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[steven c newman]

In regards to a caliper to check FOR set....(do NOT assume every saw you pick up will need to be "set") First thing I will do is place a thumb and index finger on the teeth back by the handle...then slide the two along the tooth line all the way to the end....THAT is my caliper for checking for set....also the easiest way to check for any mis-set teeth the stick out too far, and also find any broken teeth.

If I do not feel any set, I set the saw back down on the counter, and walk on to the next vendor....Most of the older saws were given way too much set, anyway.

Also, while I am running the "caliper" down the tooth line...I am also sighting down the length of the saw....looking for any kinkiness going on...and how straight the saw is.....
It a saw has more "twists & turns" than a back country road....not worth the time to buy. one or 2, I MIGHT buy....I can fix those....have seen a few saws with 5 or more kinks, curves, and whatnot...they will stay with the vendor.

[steven c newman]

I remember a video put out by Disston....that showed all the steps they themselves do, before a saw is sold....including how they sharpened the saws....

[Jack Dover]

Whatever your reason behind knowing an absolute value of the set might be - this is just a wrong method. This is why:

1. You assume the set is perfectly constant along the length. But since saws are set manually there's a variation on every tooth. Even a machine set saw will have quite a bit of variation along the length. No guarantee that reading 1" away will be even close.

2. There's an error in every measuring device. Make several measurements with a precise caliper of a gauge block - they will be different.

3. Given that actual values are at the extreme of a caliper or a micrometer, you're dealing with quite a bit of rounding error (you don't see it 'cos a tool does "rounding" for you and you don't event know it), which makes your measurements quite random.

There's a whole science of measuring, you might be really surprised to learn that having a high precision measuring tool isn't a guarantee of a high precision answer.

We do things because of curiosity, it's fine, so if you want to know an exact amount of set - measure a kerf and average it over at least 10 readings. Get a few scraps, preferably different species (teeth are springy), make sure they're wide enough so that cuts can be spaced apart at least 1". Run a 10 kerfs with the grain and 10 more across the grain. Measure the width of the kerfs. It will be hard to measure widths with calipers or anything similar, so just get a set of automotive feeler gauges (make sure all the oil is wiped off) and use these instead of calipers. Throw away outliers and average the measures - this will be a pretty close answer. Actually it will accurate to an order of magnitude if my memory serves me right, that is, an error of measurements will be below your thinnest shim. For added precision measure rip kerfs separately from cross kerfs. Actually this is the Lab 01 in Metrology 101 quite literally, I'm not kidding.

If you just want a ballpark number - three or four measurements is enough, but use shims on a kerf, don't measure teeth.

[Jim Koepke]

1. You assume the set is perfectly constant along the length. But since saws are set manually there's a variation on every tooth. Even a machine set saw will have quite a bit of variation along the length. No guarantee that reading 1" away will be even close.

Some of my old taper ground saws seem to have more set at the heal than at the toe. Some times when starting a cut if the full length of the saw isn't used in the first few kerfs the saw may bind as the full length is engaged.

One solution for this has been to withdraw the saw and use the heal of the saw to widen the kerf at the beginning of the cut.

jtk

[Edward Weber]

Short answer, is measure the kerf not the saw.
Another dead horse thoroughly beaten

[Andrew Pitonyak]

If you are having difficulty sharpening, post your location and perhaps someone can even help you sharpen your saw.

I do not know much about saw sharpening, but, when my saw stops cutting well I sharpen it and it works better. If you live near the middle of Ohio, I can at least commiserate with you how difficult saws are to sharpen! :D

[Jack Dover]

That's also true, people do all kinds of things to the set, a tool is being adjusted a particular task or for a user's convenience. I personally don't think the absolute value of a set is important as long as a saw doesn't bind and a kerf isn't too wide so a saw wanders in a cut. Just wanted to point out that just taking calipers to a saw isn't the right way. There's so many variables that affect the final kerf and we probably want them to average themselves.

I used to think that finer kerf leads to better precision, so a thinner saw plate is preferred. Apparently the connection between these isn't that straightforward. A few weeks back I was messing with a Jackson dovetail saw. This saw has a pistol grip and a balance I like, but it has a thicker plate which I didn't like: it was almost twice as thick as an LN dovetail or a Crown gents saw. At first it seemed like a coarser tool, fat kerf and all that, had some issues with set, had to be re-sharpened, etc. But by the end of a second hour I was able to reliably split a 0.5mm pencil line with it just as I can do it with a thinner plate. It also tracks better in dense woods like maple or coarse grained like red oak, so I guess the reason for thicker plates in 18th-19th centuries was a pragmatic one.

[David Carroll]

Ten years ago (or more maybe) I bought an original Kenyon backsaw c.1780, I think it might've been what we call a carcass saw. But I'm not sure. At the time I was really into the Seaton Chest and wanting a set of saws like those. I bought the saw from a well known collector and it was in decent shape except the teeth had been filed very poorly. Back then I didn't file my own saws, at least not very well. So I contacted Mike Wenzloff, who at the time was just beginning to sell Seaton Chest saw reproductions. I ordered a set for myself and wrote to him about fixing up and sharpening the teeth on the old saw. He agreed and I shipped it out to him.

He said it looked as though it had originally been filed cross-cut and that he recommended filing it that way too. I agreed. He said he had to file and joint the saw repeatedly to bring the teeth back in line and he gave it a very light set, fearing that the plate might be brittle and the teeth might snap off. I don't remember how much set he said he used.

When I got the saw back, it cut like a laser! It tracked perfectly and never bound in a cut. The thing was, the saw plate was really thick! Way more than twice as thick as similar saws today. Easily as thick as a common panel saw.

He liked the saw so much he reproduced it and offered it for sale on his website, along with the Seaton saws. Man, I miss him!

My point is that a thick saw plate, and a narrow set can work fine if the saw is sharpened well. I ended up selling the saw to pay for medical expenses. The bruises on my back side from kicking myself have mostly healed. I still have the Seaton saws he made for me. The first batch he made with his own medallion. I use them often and enjoy them immensely.

DC

[Jack Dover]

Have you already watched this? https://youtu.be/3SPcan3iRt0 An interesting talk by Shane Skelton on history of British saws.

One thing I would really interesting that at some point a variety of back saws was way wider than the usual three we're used to. Jaq mentions that about the time Seaton chest was assembled the trade with colonies boomed. This lead to a thriving woodworking industry and extensive use of exotic woods, most of which were dense and hard. It wasn't unusual for a craftsman to order a saw tailored for a particular type of wood, that would assume a particular plate size and thickness and also a particular tooth profile, which could be either rip, cross or some combination of these. These saws were prized and preserved, but used for several generations. This means that surviving ones are definitely work hardened and can lost a few teeth very easy - Mike was right about the danger.

[David Carroll]

Have you already watched this? https://youtu.be/3SPcan3iRt0 An interesting talk by Shane Skelton on history of British saws.

One thing I would really interesting that at some point a variety of back saws was way wider than the usual three we're used to. Jaq mentions that about the time Seaton chest was assembled the trade with colonies boomed. This lead to a thriving woodworking industry and extensive use of exotic woods, most of which were dense and hard. It wasn't unusual for a craftsman to order a saw tailored for a particular type of wood, that would assume a particular plate size and thickness and also a particular tooth profile, which could be either rip, cross or some combination of these. These saws were prized and preserved, but used for several generations. This means that surviving ones are definitely work hardened and can lost a few teeth very easy - Mike was right about the danger.

I hadn't seen that before. Thanks for pointing it out. I really enjoyed watching it. My Kenyon saw had a steel back, beech handle (that somewhere along the line somebody set it on a hot stove and there were scorch marks on it) the stamp on the spine was faint but legible. It felt great in the hand. I never really intended to use it, but after making some cuts, just to try it out, I just loved it. I found myself reaching for it more and more often. I always felt guilty about using it, but I did anyway. I also really enjoy the Wenzloff/Kenyon saws, however the handles on the smaller saws in the set are uncomfortably small for my hands. The larger saws are just fine.

I consider selling them from time to time, but I miss the original Kenyon saw that I did sell, and so I haven't offered them up yet.

DC

[Warren Mickley]

Have you already watched this? https://youtu.be/3SPcan3iRt0 An interesting talk by Jaq Skelton on history of British saws.

One thing I would really interesting that at some point a variety of back saws was way wider than the usual three we're used to. Jaq mentions that about the time Seaton chest was assembled the trade with colonies boomed. This lead to a thriving woodworking industry and extensive use of exotic woods, most of which were dense and hard. It wasn't unusual for a craftsman to order a saw tailored for a particular type of wood, that would assume a particular plate size and thickness and also a particular tooth profile, which could be either rip, cross or some combination of these. These saws were prized and preserved, but used for several generations. This means that surviving ones are definitely work hardened and can lost a few teeth very easy - Mike was right about the danger.

I wonder where you got this information about craftsmen ordering tailor made saws. Any documentation?

There are six saws in the 1796 Seaton Chest: Two 26 inch saws and four backsaws. These are certainly adequate for a cabinetmaker.

Peter Nicholson (1812) Lists ripper, half rip, hand saw (used for both crosscut and ripping), panel saw (26 inch saw with fine teeth), and three back saws:tenon saw, sash saw, and dovetail saw.

Holtzapffel (1843) lists many saws in his work, but then says that a craftsman would have only a small handful of these.

I have never seen evidence of custom saws of two hundred years ago. Have you?

[steven c newman]

Nicholson has come a long ways...
499124
to the 1950s era....26" , 6ppi rip....
499125
Old H. Disston No. 7..vs ..the "New & Improved" H. Disston & Sons No. 7


Though..both of those have a nib..
499126

Then again..maybe Warren should ask the author of that video about THEIR info sources? Rather than attack a poster on this site?

[Edward Weber]

I wonder where you got this information about craftsmen ordering tailor made saws. Any documentation?

There are six saws in the 1796 Seaton Chest: Two 26 inch saws and four backsaws. These are certainly adequate for a cabinetmaker.

Peter Nicholson (1812) Lists ripper, half rip, hand saw (used for both crosscut and ripping), panel saw (26 inch saw with fine teeth), and three back saws:tenon saw, sash saw, and dovetail saw.

Holtzapffel (1843) lists many saws in his work, but then says that a craftsman would have only a small handful of these.

I have never seen evidence of custom saws of two hundred years ago. Have you?

I had the same questions.
In the video he claims that top-end cabinet makers would order custom made saws. The implication is that many were tired of the same old saws you could get everywhere, which were almost identical, other than the makers mark or stamp on them. That and the influx of exotics help to drive this.
I would also like to see some evidence, if there is any, although it may no longer exist even if it's true.
If true, I would think only the most successful or wealthiest of makers could afford this.
https://www.skeltonsaws.co.uk/sheffield-range
Skelton Saws says this about the Seaton dovetail saw:
"the original saw costing six shillings back in 1797 was the equivalent of three days pay for a highly skilled craftsman."

[Jack Dover]

I wonder where you got this information about craftsmen ordering tailor made saws. Any documentation?

From the stream I've linked above, basically the message you were replying to provides a source. I didn't fact check that though.

Note that you list just general types of saws. Saying "a sash saw with fine teeth" doesn't tell anything about its length, plate or TPI. Given a range of variations of these parameter that circulate around it doesn't seem hard to believe that saws were made to a task. "Custom made" or not depends on your definition of "custom", Shane doesn't seem to imply that an individual saw was made to an individual order. My understanding is rather every type had a range of parameters, i.e. a sash saw could be had in lengths from 10" to 14" inches in some increment, 10 to 15TPI, brass or steel backed, taper ground or not (for example) and so on. Again, doesn't seem too unbelievable that there could be different plate thickness among brands or even within a single brand. In fact I think there must have been quite a bit of variation given the state of machine manufacturing of the time.

[steven c newman]

For a LONG time..in the Disston catalogs (look it up,IF you will) a model number saw was listed strictly by length....The buyer then requested the ppi for a particular saw....when placing an order. Maybe such was common practice back in the "day"...