I'm sure there must be innumerable contributions on this subject, but I can't find them. I put something up myself recently which in recollection wasn't so very clever, so I'm trying again here. The principles of cleaning should be to put the tool into attractive condition, but without damaging or destroying any historical features. If you particularly like a saw, you should aim for the sort of condition an owner would have had it in during its prime - sharp, clean, useable. I spend a few hours a week at the saw collection at the Ken Hawley Collection Trust (http://www.hawleytoolcollection.com), where we have about 2000 saws. Many of them I have bought as very cheap and dirty job lots, and cleaning them is a major task. This week I thought I'd illustrate what I try and do, with the example illustrated here (if it works...) The saw is a12inch iron back of about 1890, marked Armitage (a Sheffield maker) London (weasel word - an attempt to brag). It was grossly rusty and sad, and 30 minutes were spent on it, using dry garnet paper (60 grit, 80 grit and 180 grit in succession), and Renaissance wax applied with a nylon kitchen pan scourer to the wood, and with a rag to the metal at the end. I've found that it's only very seldom that a saw can't be brought to something like this one, unless the plate is very pitted and corroded. The wax is a secret formula developed in the museum trades for preserving almost all materials, from metal to wood, leather etc. It's commercially available, but expensive. I'd welcome comments!
Hi Simon, Our posting paths have crossed re cleaning saws, but in answer to your general query, I cannot fault your principles or materials (although I know not of the museum gunk that you apply). I do have the odd comment re their applications though. Disclaimer:- My personal preference is not to clean saws unless it is absolutely necessary, and virtually never to clean an old or rare saw. (Not that I have many.) I would have to be desperate, and so would the saw have to be, to start with 60 grit. It is a monstrous beast, even when in the form of garnet paper. I have lost (temporarily) my garnet paper but from memory I only ordered 80 grit up to 300 and 120 is normally the grade that I would start with. I don't think that I would use even 120 on a handle. Triple 0 or preferably 0000 grade wire wool is normally my handle cleaning material of choice. Now this is where it gets a little contentious. Because I start with 120, it can take an inordinate amount of time and effort to cut through really bad rust and crud, and as I am essentially a lazy person I am inclined, on occasion, to use a palm profile electric sander with garnet paper glued over the proprietary sand paper supplied for it, as the abrasive papers are now nearly all fastened by hook and loop (velcro). And I have found no hook and loop garnet paper yet. This has the disadvantage that resulting pattern on the steel (never on a brass back - only 0000 wire wool + cleaner/lubricant) comprises tiny circles but which can be removed relatively easily by manual longitudinal sanding. The advantage that it has, is that you can get right up to the cheek with the sander and so you don't have that cleaning line running parallel with the curve of the cheek for its entire length.. I hate to see that. I have still not found a way of of properly cleaning the tooth-line without inflicting some damage on it or alternatively of taking an enormous amount of time to do it virtually one tooth at a time. I normally end up by sawing a chunk of damp hardwood. Which works some of the time, otherwise I just leave it. I have recently taken to using a very dense brass wire brush which is not nearly as effective as grit, but gives a tidier looking finish without adversely affecting the patina too much. As for preservation post cleaning and in the absence of your super gunk, I try to use the diluted soft furniture polish mentioned in the Mitchell Thompson thread. This is good for the wood, but poor for the blade. For metal I go at the moment for the undiluted proprietary polish. This is still not good but better than nothing. I may try at some stage using a harder wax on the blade/back such as that used on flooring in place of varnish. I have three or four Sorby backsaws which are not part of my collection that at some stage I may sell. If I do I will put a "before and after" to compare with yours. Don't hold your breath waiting though, it may take some time to get round to it. Fred
Hey Simon and Fred. I think you hit the nail on the head Simon when you begin with the premise of what your intent is with the saws. It has reached the point for me that it is more of preservation and not necessarily for use. I have great new eastern and western saws that can really do anything I could ask in a saw without compromising a complete cleaning that I can't return to some sort of original feel and beauty that it matured with. A friend and I had this epiphany some years ago with infill planes and we realized that to make them work properly and as they were intended we would literally have to take them apart and start again to get the planes to work to our high expectations and they still weren't as good as what we were eventually able to construct new. There are some basket cases that need a complete overhaul and I use these often just for experience and experimentation. Most saws I acquire now, I take it that blades need to have rust stopped and handles set so they don't rattle around so much. As I have previously mentioned, I just scrape the heavy rust off the blades with a wide chisel blade trying not to scrape or dig into the metal. I think this has to be the major work done since rust will destroy the saw and slowing its progress is essential. I agree with Fred when he says that beginning with 60 grit is too aggressive. After a scrape I may use a 400 SC based paper with lubricant. I have also now begun to use 3M scotch pads all done in the same direction. I never touch the brass including the saw nuts and that is usually just an aesthetic choice but I prefer that look. Handle stability is all I am again concerned with and so waxes suit me fine. I find the handle that you completed, to my eye, is over cleaned but I don't know if it was aggressively sanded like the blade. One of our leading saw collectors takes every saw and takes them apart, cleans and sands everything and puts it all back together. To each their own, he owns them. It takes a saw a while to get back to a "mature" look and most will never be loved every day as they probably all were in their early life. They were expensive items. Simon, I am curious as to the wax you are able to get from the conservators. I have used Renaissance wax but now I like BRIWAX clear if I can get it. What is it about this wax you are most impressed with? Is there an inventory of the Hawley collection. 2000 saws, sound so cool and I am glad you are involved. All the best Joe S.
Hello All, I truly enjoy this discussion, trying to get to the nub of how much to intervene in stabilizing the condition of these saws we love. I agree very much with your comment, Joe, that establishing an intent, as Simon has, is primary. Of course, we all interpret our words with our own slant. When Simon desires his saws to look attractive, we can all agree to that as a suitable goal, but surely we also all find different aspects of the saws attractive. Some might find the dirt of use and handling to be proud indicator of a long, active life shaping wood. To others, it's just plain dirt and may obscure grain or figure. But, as Joe also says, we own'em and can do what we want. I think it's when we see a larger responsibility to history, as they do in museums for their own collections, that just owning them is no longer sufficient justification for whatever we want to do. Having worked in museums most of my life, my experience brings a few comments that may be pertinent. In the field of conservation there is a concept called "inherent vice", which essentially refers to a condition which, if not removed or stabilized, will destroy the object For us saw collectors that immediately refers, of course, to rust. We all take what we think is the best action to remove it and prevent any further rusting. On an extremely rusted saw it might even become necessary to remove the blade if rust has built up under the handle to the point where it's splitting it. Removing split nuts can be a major and dangerous step to take, but it's better than a shattered handle. Joe addresses another condition of "inherent vice" by stabilizing the saw's handle, realizing that continuing to allow it to slip loosely back and forth can damage the saw screws and deepen the cut made in the handle for the blade When cleaning objects, museum conservators do the work in gradual stages, first doing a light cleaning over the entire object, then a further cleaning, etc. As they go they'll notice areas that are not susceptible to further cleaning (deep stains, pitting, etc). At that point they give consideration to how much further they'll clean, since one of their goals is to have a fairly even appearing surface. We've all seen spotty saws, usually created while pursuing the eradication of rust, and I think we generally find them unattractive. When I'm removing rust from saw blade, using any or all the techniques described in this thread, I'll try to do that same thing. First I'll try a light cleaning which will begin to identify the problem spots on the blade. Then I'll start to clean locally, just on those problem spots, to bring them to as clean a state as I can, before working over the rest of the saw to bring it up to the condition of the problem spots. To some extent that technique can mitigate that spotty saw condition. But I only have a few dozen saws. The thousands that Simon cares for in Sheffield may demand more wholesale methods of cleaning. And then there are paint spots. Me? I pick'em off with scalpel and magnifiers. Regards, David
For a slightly different angle, I present the words of the brash and inexperienced (I read this ... I don't know what they are trying to say about you garnet guys http://lumberjocks.com/topics/41640 ) My backsaws are all 20thC so a different kettle of fish. I am also a bit different in that I have mainly handsaws rather than backsaws, and probably the ID pathways are different, but FWIW ... My first aim on receiving a 'new' saw is to understand as much about it as I can deduce. Maker, model, date of birth. Handles and medallions are one obvious indicator. Then any etch or stamp. Handsaws often arrive in varying stages of unlovedness ... from dust and coats of lacquer or paint to active red rust ... although some are quite clean and dignified. Bob Smalser wrote about using razor blades to clean off rust - I've tried it but don't like it. I often start with 80grit cloth-backed 'sandpaper' ... which from reading that link perhaps equates to 60grit garnet? always lubricating generously with WD40. But I always read that you should use abrasive wrapped around a block so as not to 'dig out' an etch. I might use a 2" by 10" piece initially in a roll for roughing off, but in general I like to use two fingers behind the 'paper' (mostly unrolled) so that I can continuously vary the pressure I am applying depending on where the etch might be, and how much resistance or smoothness I am feeling. I use old pieces when I want to work more carefully, and change to 2000grit paper from the auto shop when I am trying to reveal more detail around some existing detail. Most of my saws* have gotten to the investigated stage, but not an overall cleaning stage. I use lanolin on the metal (and wood) - it is excellent for storage, probably less so for display purposes. (Lanolin because Australia rides on the sheeps' back. Well less so now. It's mainly in the back of a massive tip-truck in an open-cut mine these days ... but I tried covering them in iron-ore dust and the results were poor to average. ) (* I have pictures of some of them up here ... https://plus.google.com/photos/103554365489606721190/albums?banner=pwa ) I have only seen two finishes I found offensive ... a sawplate wire-wheeled to a semi-reflective but highly variable polish ... and the dead, dull matte grey of a few saws that I assume were subjected to extensive electrolysis. I don't know if an etch can survive through that treatment - and to me the end result is horrible. I have many fantastic handles that feel awesome in hand ... I haven't created any of those so would definitely like to hear about great wood finishes. Cheers, Paul
Hi Guys, There was a lengthy discussion on WoodNet.net a couple of months ago regarding cleaning of hand saws. http://www.forums.woodnet.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=6366663&page=&view=&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 While many of us have used most of the traditional methods for cleaning plates (sandpaper, razor blades, scrapers, chisels, etc.), one fellow described a method using metal polish (Autosol, Flitz, or similar) and a wad of tin foil. He claimed that it lightly scraped away rust and polished the metal at the same time. A number of guys, including myself, gave it a try and were impressed with the results. It might not work well on a heavily rusted plate, but it indeed cleaned, lightened stains, and polished the metal without harming the etch. I would be interested in hearing what you fellows think about this technique. There seems to be lots of benefits: it does not remove as much base metal, it does not introduce additional scratches, it is less messy than oil or other liquid, and it is inexpensive since tin foil is cheap and very little polish is required. Thanks, Bob
Hi Bob, In my (limited) testing of the foil/polish method, it seemed to put a shine on a sawplate that I would consider already "clean" (ie smooth, but maybe a bit stained) But it didn't remove real rust, rust that had any degree of roughness, that stuff that produces orange powder when dry sanded. So I currently consider the foil/polish method to be a good finishing process after any rough rust has been removed or smoothed by scraping/sanding. But maybe I need to test with some different types of polish.......(another item on the "to do" list) Rob
I wonder if the 2000grit auto paper might be doing the same sort of thing as the foil & polish. At least in the sense of a fine, polishing degree of abrasion. I don't know about any chemical effect that is supposed to occur with the tin-foil. I also forgot to say that fairly recently I have found some saws that I tried to clear around the etch area some months ago and put aside as inconclusive and 'needs more thought/work' have benefited from just sitting inside the house. I suppose that through a very gentle 'rusting' mechanism, the etches have gained some life - to the point where I could determine better detail from them. These saws were not waxed or oiled, and I don't suppose they would have regained anything over time if they had been. :shrug: Cheers, Paul
A hot topic, it seems! A few amendments to my first posting: I only use 60 grit on very rusty saws, like the one I showed. On less rusty ones, and on etches, I often go to 120 straight away. On some etches I use a cloth and renaissance wax only, more to clean than to abrade. I use garnet mainly because Ken Hawley told me that garnet is harder than rust, but softer than steel. I certainly don't use it on brass. And yes, Fred, I use a brass wire brush as a finish tool on the teeth. I've taken this opportunity to actually check Ken's belief. Mr Google tells me (or rather Mr Wikepedia) that there are lots of different garnet stones, but that their hardness is 6.5-7.5 on the Mohs scale, with hardened steel 7.5-8 (although the same article says rather confusingly that a steel file is 6.5}. Knowing less than nothing about the science of all this, it does sound as though Ken is broadly correct. The wikipedia entry on renaissance wax is useful - it does seem to have theoretical advantages over other wax polishes. I was very surprised a how the handle came up with very little work - certainly the wood was horribly dry and dead. I don't take a handle off, even if it is apparent that a lot of rust has built up under the wood, simply because the usual screws are in my experience impossible to replace - they were never meant to come off, after all. With modern screws there is not much difficulty, but almost never a need either. If the handle has split because of wear etc, I'd resign myself to a loose handle and not have the saw as a user. Yes, there tends to be a last bit of rust very close to the handle, but using a flat piece of wood (eg the handle of the wire brush) you can get the abrasive paper virtually up to very edge, and then I do a bit of cautious work with the wire brush along the line of the handle which doesn't show any scratch marks. And the steel after electrolytic cleaning has an appearance I personally dislike very much - again, a sort of deadness that defies even Ren wax to get it anything like the original glazing process. thanks to you all for much enlightenment.