Brown's No. 3 handsaw by Keystone Saw Works

[Kurtis Johnson]

Hello folks. I have a project. It's a Brown's No. 3 crosscut handsaw by Keystone Saw Works I picked up from a younger gentleman who said it was his great (maybe great great) grandfather's.

It's a more affordable Disston, of lesser quality, but for the life of me I can't tell why. It's quite handsome, to my eye—on par with my most distinguished Disstons.

It might, MIGHT, be just a freckle thicker overall, but I'm still looking at that. More importantly, it has an equally fast taper. Weighs less than an ounce-and-a-half more than my No. 7.

Here's what surprise me. It has remnants of a medallion label. Definitely a Disston-style label, but it's easy to see from what's left that it said something different than the Disston label did. (Does anyone know of labels on Keystone Saw Works saws, and does anyone know what they said?) It's a puzzle to me a 2nd tier saw would get a label because the purpose of the label was to authenticate bonafide Disstons, or so I've read.

I'm thinking about trying to preserve the tiny bits of label and the stain leftover by the missing label by an extremely gentle cleaning and a few coats of shellac. Anyone have experience with preserving paper labels like this, and can the bits of label be protected from use? Or would this labor be a nonstarter?

IMG_2640.jpgIMG_2636.jpg
IMG_2642.jpgIMG_2648.jpg


For comparison, the Disston label below, (image from the Disstonian Institute).

IMG_2689.JPG


The following is from the 1918 Disston catalog.

IMG_5681.jpg IMG_5675.jpg

[Stew Denton]

Kurtis,

I am not going to answer your main question much the only comments on that being at the end of the post, but will comment on one minor question you mentioned. Concerning your why is it considered "lesser quality" question.

I have a Jackson back saw (made by Disston, their lower priced line of that time period, and a Disston #4 for the same time period (the only better quality back saw I have). The differences between my two saws is probably similar to the differences between your Keystone (which as you essentially point out was Disston's lower price line later in their history), and their flagship brand "Disston" saws. In my view there are some differences that I can see woith my two saws, which are:

1. The handle on the Disston is nicer than the handle on the Jackson. The Jackson handle is just fine, an excellent user, but it doesn't have the graceful thin horns like the Disston does. It does not have the nice details that make the Disston handle more attractive, such as it has an oval hand hold cut out as opposed to the birds mouth cut out at the lower front of the cut out that the Disston has. In fact there are 4 or 5 places in the handle where the Disston was given graceful lines to make it more attractive, but which took additional time to do as compared to the Keystone.

2. The finish on the metal of the Disston appears to be a little nicer than the Keystone, but not greatly so, just a bit more smoothing was done, perhaps. Both saws are between 120 and 130 years old, I think, and need to have some restoration work done before I want to use them much, primarily just to spruce them us some but also to repair small spots in the handles, and remove some dark color light surface corrosion, etc. Because of this it it a little hard to see with absolute certainty about the finish on the metal parts but even so, the Disston seems just a might nicer, but not a great deal nicer.

3. I have been told, but do not know from observation because the finish on the handles is dark enough that you can't tell for certain. However, I have read that the Disston saws normally had apple wood handles, where as the Jackson often did not have apple handles. The wood they used for the Jackson line was just fine for practical purposes, it just wasn't quite as nice in appearance as was the Apple wood. It would take me some time to sort out the types of wood even if the finish was still light enough that you could tell something about the type of wood used, but I have read that such is the case. I have also read that in their premium saw line they occasionally use rosewood handles, but have not verified such.

I do not know about the types of steel used in the two product lines, but am sure that both have excellent steel. I am quite sure that both saws will be excellent users. I have other lower priced saws from that time period, the "Warranted Superior" hand saws, and every one I have is an excellent user, at least the ones I have spruced up and use regularly.

I think the Jackson saws are likely very good users, and the appearance is quite acceptable. The Disston saws just have the little extra details adding to the appearance of the saw, and may have a better grade of steel, and perhaps a little more careful done finishing. What I do know is that I am certain that I would be quite happy with the quality of either of the two saws in actual use.

From a practical standpoint, I think my Jackson will be a fine user, it just won't be quite as nice appearance wise as my Disston.

Like you, I would also try to save the paper label. I would do some experimenting before trying to work on the actual label, however. I would try it to find some paper in similar condition to the label, maybe some modern news paper or some old paper that has some age on it to experiment with.

My initial attempt, again, using the substitute paper and a scrap of well sanded hardwood, would be to first put a coat of finish on the hardwood scrap and then to let it dry for a few days. I would then experiment with something like lacquer and a small and fine artists brush, and brush on a light coat on the now finished scrap of hardwood, and then see if I could get the paper to stick to the finish by letting it dry until it was pretty tacky and then trying to stick it down. I would do several trials until I found what would work and I knew what I was doing.

If the lacquer does not work well I would try other finishes I had in the shop, in hope that something would work well.

Once the experimenting was done I would attempt to use the fine artist brush to work a very thin coat of finish between the actual paper label and the handle, let it dry to the point that gave you success with the experiments and then stick the real label down. You might have to use something like tooth picks or paper clips to keep the paper and the finished handle apart so that the finish will dry just the right amount to get the paper to stick down to the handle.

At that point I will have experimented more with seeing if a scrap of the practice paper would keep the writing nice and readable with the spray lacquer on it. It might not, the lacquer might soak in and make the paper tend to become semi-translucent. I don't know what it will do, you will have to experiment. If the spray lacquer makes it translucent you will again have to experiment. I might try sanding sealer, or some other finish. One key is VERY thin coats of spray, so it will dry fairly quickly without soaking in much.

Once those issues are solved I would then mask off maybe a 1/4 inch around the stuck down label and use the best results from the finish on the paper testing to put finish over the paper. I would put on two or three coats and then pull off the masking and refinish the rest of the handle.

Such may not be the best approach, but it is what I would try. I would want a few coats of finish over the paper and the rest of the handle to protect the paper from wear.

Stew

[lowell holmes]

Sounds like a fun project to me. Enjoy it.
I have several Disston saws including a 10 point D12 that came to me with a piece of a handle.
It now is now shiny, re-toothed, and has a curly maple handle with brass saw nuts.
It cuts like it is supposed to.
IMG_0307.jpg

[Pete Taran]

You mean these labels? If you buy right, no need to put on a new handle or retooth.

On a serious note, the micro fragments of your remaining label don't warrant any sort of preservation in my view. They will eventually flake off if you use the saw. You could use the full labels shown below and print out color replacements if you really feel that strongly about it.

Additionally, Disston in their own catalogs said that the Keystone saws were: "Equal to any saw manufactured that is not branded Disston". In the catalog I'm looking at, the cost for a 26" #7 was $20/doz, while the Brown's #3 in the same size was $13.50/dozen. In my view, the difference is in how polished the blade is. You can see the grind marks in the #3 I have, which you can't in the #7. It was a lot of work to grind and polish those blades to that degree.



KeystoneLabel1.jpgKeystyoneLabel2.jpg

[Kurtis Johnson]

You mean these labels? If you buy right, no need to put on a new handle or retooth.


KeystoneLabel1.jpg

Yes! Wow, that is the exact same one! Thank you, thank you. I knew someone would come through. I'm so glad to have seen that. The medallion on yours is fantastic. Obviously older than mine.

On a serious note, the micro fragments of your remaining label don't warrant any sort of preservation in my view. They will eventually flake off if you use the saw. You could use the full labels shown below and print out color replacements if you really feel that strongly about it.

I appreciate your take. It pains me to remove the micro fragments, but in the end it makes the most sense.

I'm all about authenticity. It's only new once. While I like preserving what's there, and getting it functional again, I won't be reproducing anything. Thanks for the thought and the offer though.

Additionally, Disston in their own catalogs said that the Keystone saws were: "Equal to any saw manufactured that is not branded Disston". In the catalog I'm looking at, the cost for a 26" #7 was $20/doz, while the Brown's #3 in the same size was $13.50/dozen. In my view, the difference is in how polished the blade is. You can see the grind marks in the #3 I have, which you can't in the #7. It was a lot of work to grind and polish those blades to that degree.

I looked at the cost difference as well, and I figure it's quite a bit inflated. Typical marketing model. But I bet you're right about the degree of finish of the saw plate. Might explain why it's a freckle thicker, and a hair heavier too. However, in it's refurbished state (not pictured) any difference is not so apparent.

Thanks for the post.

[Kurtis Johnson]

1. The handle on the Disston is nicer than the handle on the Jackson. The Jackson handle is just fine, an excellent user, but it doesn't have the graceful thin horns like the Disston does. It does not have the nice details that make the Disston handle more attractive, such as it has an oval hand hold cut out as opposed to the birds mouth cut out at the lower front of the cut out that the Disston has. In fact there are 4 or 5 places in the handle where the Disston was given graceful lines to make it more attractive, but which took additional time to do as compared to the Keystone.

I think that's what makes it tough to see a difference in this case, the shaping of the handle is every bit as complex as my nicest Disstons.

2. The finish on the metal of the Disston appears to be a little nicer than the Keystone, but not greatly so, just a bit more smoothing was done, perhaps. Both saws are between 120 and 130 years old, I think, and need to have some restoration work done before I want to use them much, primarily just to spruce them us some but also to repair small spots in the handles, and remove some dark color light surface corrosion, etc. Because of this it it a little hard to see with absolute certainty about the finish on the metal parts but even so, the Disston seems just a might nicer, but not a great deal nicer.

Well put. It would make all sorts of sense to be the case in this case. But like you said, it is very difficult to discern the difference after refurbishing.

3. I have been told, but do not know from observation because the finish on the handles is dark enough that you can't tell for certain. However, I have read that the Disston saws normally had apple wood handles, where as the Jackson often did not have apple handles. The wood they used for the Jackson line was just fine for practical purposes, it just wasn't quite as nice in appearance as was the Apple wood. It would take me some time to sort out the types of wood even if the finish was still light enough that you could tell something about the type of wood used, but I have read that such is the case. I have also read that in their premium saw line they occasionally use rosewood handles, but have not verified such.

Yeah, I bet in this case it's beech. A nice piece of beech. But beech. The catalog even says so. Again, would make marketing sense.

Like you, I would also try to save the paper label. I would do some experimenting before trying to work on the actual label, however. I would try it to find some paper in similar condition to the label, maybe some modern news paper or some old paper that has some age on it to experiment with.

My initial attempt, again, using the substitute paper and a scrap of well sanded hardwood, would be to first put a coat of finish on the hardwood scrap and then to let it dry for a few days. I would then experiment with something like lacquer and a small and fine artists brush, and brush on a light coat on the now finished scrap of hardwood, and then see if I could get the paper to stick to the finish by letting it dry until it was pretty tacky and then trying to stick it down. I would do several trials until I found what would work and I knew what I was doing.

If the lacquer does not work well I would try other finishes I had in the shop, in hope that something would work well.

Once the experimenting was done I would attempt to use the fine artist brush to work a very thin coat of finish between the actual paper label and the handle, let it dry to the point that gave you success with the experiments and then stick the real label down. You might have to use something like tooth picks or paper clips to keep the paper and the finished handle apart so that the finish will dry just the right amount to get the paper to stick down to the handle.

At that point I will have experimented more with seeing if a scrap of the practice paper would keep the writing nice and readable with the spray lacquer on it. It might not, the lacquer might soak in and make the paper tend to become semi-translucent. I don't know what it will do, you will have to experiment. If the spray lacquer makes it translucent you will again have to experiment. I might try sanding sealer, or some other finish. One key is VERY thin coats of spray, so it will dry fairly quickly without soaking in much.

Once those issues are solved I would then mask off maybe a 1/4 inch around the stuck down label and use the best results from the finish on the paper testing to put finish over the paper. I would put on two or three coats and then pull off the masking and refinish the rest of the handle.

Such may not be the best approach, but it is what I would try. I would want a few coats of finish over the paper and the rest of the handle to protect the paper from wear.

Stew

I deliberated and deliberated over this. Ugh. But as much as it pains me to say it, I think I'm going to remove the fragments. Ugh!! Thank you for the fine advice though. I really pored over it and even began planning how I was going to employ your advice. But in the end, I think would be too fragile for a working saw. I have a strong predilection for shellac on tool handles for it's tactile warmth and it's ability and need to be refreshed from time to time when it gets worn. I can't imagine those fragments holding up with that. But who knows, I might change my mind again, lol!

Thanks for the post.

[Stew Denton]

Kurtis,

You are not alone in liking the shellac, a lot of guys like it for saw handles, at least when the subject has come up in the past, and also plane knobs and totes. It sure smells better than lacquer. Quite a few shellac, and after adequate coverage, they then put on a few coats of paste wax.

After thinking about it more, I would probably do what you have decided to do also. I am a user of old tools, not a collector. In my case it would probably make more sense not to fight it and instead just take the handle down and refinsh it, not trying to save the paper label, especially if like you I used shellac.

I use spray lacquer when in a hurry to get a handle done, but if not in a hurry use polyurethane. The poly U is tough stuff and lasts a very long time. After either finish I go to past wax. The first saw I restored I put a couple or three of coats of poly U on the handle (I think 2 or 3, but it was definately poly U.)and have used the tar out of it ever since and the poly U finish is still excellent and again, I have used that saw a lot. I may have used BLO below the poly U, I can't remember though because that was around 45 years ago. Thus the handle has stood up to fairly hard use for about 45 years.

Stew

[Kurtis Johnson]

Thanks again Stew. (It's not fair when the OP changes his mind and does a 180º!)