Full restoration or a light touch ?

Discussion in 'Forum: Saw Identification and Discussion' started by rob1713, May 14, 2017.

  1. rob1713

    rob1713 Active Member

    Messages:
    44
    I'd be interested to know your views regarding how far you go with restoring quality saws that you acquire.
    I have quite a few saws of my own and I have been buying them primarily to use.
    Most of my users get the flat edges on handles rounded and sanded to a fine finish I then stain, seal and wax them. I scrape and paper the plates carefully to the best compromise finish, then sharpen them. I do replace nuts if required but obviously always keep any medallions that are present
    I have seen some saws here that go through a similar process and some that get a light clean and treatment to prevent further decay/ corrosion.
    Im aware that in most collecting fields to much cleaning can ruin an items patina ( and hence value) is this always true with saws ?
    I'm guessing that some of you use your saws and also collect non users, I'd be interested to know how you come to the decision about whether to restore to use or keep on show.
    Regards
    Rob
     
  2. David

    David Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    315
    Hi Rob,
    I guess the first decision about what to do with a saw is to determine your purpose for acquiring it. If you got it to use it then certainly you want the handle to be comfortable, the plate clean and smooth and the teeth sharp. Otherwise it's not so usable.
    But if the saw was collected for it's rarity or it's historical value then you would perhaps make other decisions. I would think that cleaning the handle (removing grime and paint) is a reasonable treatment. But I wouldn't sand it or refinish it. If the handle was damaged (a missing horn, a cracked lambs tongue, etc.) one might go either way, since it won't be used. Personally, I often like to replace a missing horn, since I find the absence of it so disturbing to the appearance of the saw. In that same vein, if the cracked lambs tongue can be glued together again neatly, I'd do that. Some other collectors choose to leave a saw just as they found it.
    In terms of the condition of the sawplate, I choose to remove active rust if I can do it evenly ( not over clean it, which sometimes leaves the plate looking spotty with scattered pitting). To that end, I'd clean the whole plate lightly, check that it looks even, then perhaps clean more, until I discover that there are areas that I can't get any cleaner. Then I'd stop, hopefully leaving the plate with a consistent, even appearance. Other collectors might do nothing, or perhaps just oil the rusty plate or wax it to slow or stop the rusting. If there's no active rust, I'd probably choose to leave it alone.
    In short, some of us like shiny refinished saws, looking perhaps like new, while at the other end of the spectrum some of us do nothing to the saws. And plenty of folks fall somewhere in between.
    But generally, I think uncommon saws are best left alone. Refinishing a Disston D-8 and sanding and polishing the plate should be fine since there are so many of them in the world. But an 18c saw is a rare bird and leaving it just as it was found preserves the chance of our discovering any information that might be discovered from examining it. Each of us makes our own decision which way to go with our saws. For me the main determinant is the rarity of the saw. And rarity can be due simply to the fact that it's an early saw from a maker who later made zillions of saws. But the early one is very uncommon and should be treated more as a historical document, while the later ones can be treated as users.
    I hope this is a help. And I look forward to hearing others' opinions about it. It's a great subject.
    David
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2017
    Shaper likes this.
  3. Dusty Shed Dweller

    Dusty Shed Dweller Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    146
    Apologies if this becomes a rant because I have really strong views on this subject. I think the magic word is "condition". To me, a very rare saw in poor condition is hardly worth owning, yet a common saw in lick condition is a real prize.

    As a bloke who restores around 200 backsaws a year I strongly believe that a saw that is not useable is worthless as I am a user first and collector second... but there are some serious caveats. No vintage tool, saw or otherwise, should be over-restored. Vintage tools should look well cared for not over-dressed. We've all seen them on ebay, saws that have been abused on a belt sander or with a new replacement 1080 plate, lacquered handles and shiny brass accoutrements. That's destruction not restoration. With saws;

    1. Plates. Any refurbishing method that leaves visible scratches or modifies that colour is too harsh. That means no molasses, no wire wheels, no electrolysis, no 80 grit SiC paper on the belt sander etc, and no rubbing with anything not parallel to the grain. A decent scraper with a relevant rust-softening lubricant, followed by soft (garnet or stereated) 240 grit paper used with some persistence and patience will always suffice. Please remember that some plates have a grained finish (e.g. Disston) and removing that is indelibly changing the appearance of the saw. Many saws in good condition respond to a light polish with a cloth/OOOO grade wire wool and some good metal polish like Autosol.

    2. Handles. If the handle is decent, does it really need to come off? It is very hard to remove any nuts without minor chipping and split nuts never go back the same. I only strip any varnish if it is degraded or less than 75% remains. I always fix cracks and busted handles etc but I never get into the handle with abrasive papers... fine steel wool used gently with some restorer brew normally strips all the gunge and crud and restores the colour without stripping the age... many saw handle show tool marks that should be left as they are part of the tool. A raw handle will get a couple of protective coats of Danish oil and then wax, but avoid using BLO at all costs. And please, polyurethane is for kitchen tables, not fine tool handles. I believe that staining replacement parts or fixes to match the rest of the handle is an important part of maintaining appearance.

    3. Spines. Spines are soft (brass or iron) and mark up badly if hit with harsh abrasives. That brownish brass took 100+ years to get like that, do you really want to take that off with Brasso? Maybe a polish with a soft cloth and the slightest smear of cleaner would be more sympathetic.

    Something that should never be ignored in the restoration game is cyanoacrylate ("super") glue. It is amazing what you can do to a handle with a squeeze of this stuff and a bit of sanding dust.

    Rant over.
     
  4. Ken

    Ken Member

    Messages:
    7
    Old saws might appear plentiful for now but their numbers can only ever shrink. The more people feel compelled to tart them up the harder it becomes to tell whether or not the remaining saws have any of their original integrity.

    On the other hand it has long been argued that the needs of the collector or historian should never trounce the needs of those who want to put old saws back to work and this is the view I have always held. Saws lose their purpose if they are not used and contemporary use is a chapter in their history no less valid than any other.

    But this debate has probably been over taken by events. Hand woodwork is spreading again. Restored old saws can now attract gushing admiration on internet forums. The heroic "restorer" is encouraged to share their method so many others can copy. These acolytes then seek to become fleeting internet heroes with their own "restorations" while many others simply lust after owning a saw that looks just like these. As a result we now have a situation where the stock of old saws is being mined for commercial profit by ebay "restorers" operating on a small industrial scale and deploying mix and match techniques as a shortcut to producing a vintage style saw.

    I think maybe its time to ditch the more lassez faire attitudes and be a lot more proscriptive about the differences between good and bad practice when dealing with old saws. I think we could borrow from contemporary architectural techniques and make repairs very obvious. For example missing nuts could be replaced with something obviously modern and missing horns could be replaced with boxwood recycled from dead chisel handles and left unstained. The repair would be very effective, would show an attractive contrast with the original beech and crucially would never be mistaken for the original work. A few restorations done in this way and documented on the more popular forms could do a great deal to discourage "as new" restorations and perhaps limit the appeal of the mix n match ebay restorers.
     
  5. Ken

    Ken Member

    Messages:
    7
    Danish oil is usually BLO mixed with varnish and chemical driers. And restorer brews often also contain BLO together with a bunch of volatiles and cleaning agents which, once evaporated, leave only BLO on the surface. If a handle must be stripped to bare wood then surely better to re-finish with something that looks and feels nice without risking future confusion with an original finish. Tung oil perhaps. It's tough, smooth to the touch, easy to work with and doesn't darken. With no stain underneath it should remain recognisable as non-original.
     
  6. David

    David Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    315
    I think perhaps I skewed this discussion away from the original question. When Rob asked "how do you come to the decision about whether to restore to use or to put on show" I spent 4 out of 5 paragraphs discussing the degree to which I would restore and only one paragraph on how I actually make the decision.

    For me, being mostly a collector, the decision is easy. I only collect split nut saws, which means every saw I own is at least 125 years old. The mine I'm digging in is getting closer to the 18c these days so now I only rarely find a worthwhile nugget. I don't pretty them up. My collecting parameters are such that I view them all as historical documents and merely clean them (other than occasionally repairing a missing horn). However carefully done, the replacement horns can always be recognized as a repair, but by trying for an accurate match it means that when you look at a repaired saw it looks very much like it would have when in use, without any distracting new elements, or finishes (except for the occasional waxing). That's the choice I make.

    I think arguing about the "correct" way to handle this is a bit pointless, since we all can do what we want to our own saws which we have gathered for different reasons. Some of us care deeply about preserving history and some of us don't. There is no absolute right or wrong here.

    For my actual woodworking needs I have a few capable and sharp 20c Disston saws ( # 16 and # 8). All I did to them was clean the handles and plates and sharpen them. They're comfortable to handle and work well.
    David
     
  7. rob1713

    rob1713 Active Member

    Messages:
    44
    This has bought up some interesting views and it will definitely make me think a bit more before attempting my restoration path on any future saws that come my way. I guess I'm guilty of some of the sins listed by DSD. I have sanded handles, I use shellac to seal them before waxing, I have stained handles and I do like shiney nuts...ohh err.
    But luckily I don't think most of my 'over restored' saws are extreme rarities with the exception of the Jonas & Colver steel back saw I posted a few days ago, but in my defence it was covered in paint and I knew no better, However I did it to produce a usable saw.

    'Cut and shutting' saws is obviously not a new phenomena. I come across my saws at boot sales and local auctions in amongst boxes of other house clearance fodder. Recently I bought a job lot of spanners and fixings, in amongst it was a brass backed 14" saw marked A House, Clapham Junction. This saw had obviously not been used for many years but the handle and plate were in a reasonable condition but a little loose it had a medallion but the threaded shaft was broken so it was held in by friction and grunge. When I took it apart the extra drilled holes in the plate under the handle made it obvious that the plate was not original and the big bash marks on the brass spine showed the evidence of a previous owners attempts to get it to fit into the plate. Well he eventually got it in and even got a straight saw line. It now has new split nuts and I have epoxied the medallion on to the head one of the saw nut heads after counter sinking it into the handle so that it sits nice and flush. I did have to fit a small wedge to finally stop all handle movement.
    The point of this story is that I am glad he took these actions, he didn't do it to deceive anyone, I guess he did it as it was a cheap way of getting another life out of a saw that he used till the original plate was to shallow or kinked. Anyway I'm glad he did as it is now my favourite rip cut back saw, I'm not sure if I would have been brave enough to change the plate even if I could find a suitable donor.....that and I migh now feel guilty about separating the key original elements of a 19th century saw:oops:
     
  8. Dusty Shed Dweller

    Dusty Shed Dweller Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    146
    Ken,

    I'm not sure what comes in your locally available products marketed as "Danish oil" but the one I use (Rustins) is an admixture of Tung oil, varnish and chelated metal salt (Japan drier). If in doubt it is not hard to mix your own oil/varnish mixture. There was a significant article on this issue in Fine Wood Working relatively recently. I like tung oil as well, but find it has drying issues and I prefer the higher body that I can build with multiple coats of the Rustin's product when finishing furniture etc.

    As for restoration brews, I've never bought any and there are plenty of mixes available that use glycerine or baby oil some other lubricant in place of BLO. I can't speak for the commercial ones as I'm not familiar with those and don't use them.

    Some forums suggest using the environmentally friendly product Simple Green to clean wood.... I've tried this and the mess was something to behold. Never again.

    BLO is a nightmare in my climate - it darkens wood, it gets sticky and it grows mould. If you use it over a decayed finish you get discoloured patches that look awful.



    As to the original question on this forum, how do I assess what gets done to a saw? Basically it comes down to two camps...is it a user or a historic artefact?

    Users need to be made useable, artefacts need stabilising and nothing else e.g. active rust stabilised and maybe a clean to remove gunge and dirt. Nothing to modify the saw from original.
     
  9. Joe S

    Joe S Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    376
    Hey Rob
    Fun question as always and is sure to bring a lot of very diverse responses. I tend to fall in line with David's philosophy and collecting habits. I am a collector the majority of the time and have little need for a saw on a daily basis. As I have mentioned before, I have some very fine "new" western and eastern saws that could accomplish whatever I need them to do.
    Unlike David I haven't limited myself to split nut saws but only because of the collecting dates of some of the collection go beyond the 1900 time period. Most very early saws I leave alone completely except to wax. I will scrape red rust off later saws for preservation reasons but rarely if ever use sandpaper other that 440 grit on a saw plate. Most saw handles and plates I pick off the obligatory paint spots but invariably just wax because it is reversible. I have only replaced a horn once on a D12 to see if I could make it disappear and was very pleased with the results. Sharpening or tuning?.... results tend to vary.
    I would think if you have clicked on and participated to the identification area of this site, there is some appreciation for the importance and pleasure of a vintage saw. This might carry over to the preservation and study and so any info gleaned from an early untouched saw is appreciated. I always love to see early pics. No matter how ugly or what might be thought of as unimportant, it may be useful somewhere in the future.
    I also always subscribe to the thought that if you own it, you can do with it whatever you wish but also remind that we are all, only temporary caretakers.
    Joe S.
     
  10. rob1713

    rob1713 Active Member

    Messages:
    44
    Thanks for sharing your views on this issue Joe, after looking at the posts on this site and now owning a copy of Simons book, I feel that I have a better idea of what saws to leave ' as found but possibly a bit cleaner' (if I'm lucky enough to come across them)
    I do like to use my saws though, but I guess If I am unsure, I can always post a picture on here and get a view from those that know.
    Regards
    Rob
     
  11. ray

    ray Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    671
    I think it depends on what you are trying to do, and I'd classify the process into roughly three types.

    1. Conservation, where you try to preserve the history. Doing this properly is an art form in itself.

    2. Restoration, where you try to restore a saw to workman like order, but keep true to the manufacturer's original.
    Renaissance wax, and a good clean does wonders for a saw that is in generally sound condition. If the blade is straight, then a touch up on the teeth can do wonders.

    3. Renovation, new polished saw plate, refinish the handle, emphasis on usability and function.

    Every one will have different ideas as to what suits a particular saw.
     
  12. greyhound

    greyhound Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    47
    Hi Rob,
    I must agree with all contributors and confirm that it is down to personal preferences how you go about cleaning your saws.
    All I can think of what might help your decision is to get 4 or 5 fairly common saws from different makers and periods and try different methods. You will be able to figure out how much time it takes and how the steel | brass | wood respond. I think this is the only way for you to figure out how you like your tools to look and work. My only little input to the above is the saws with coarse teeth do not need to be cleaned as finely as the saw for delicate joinery. Fine-pitched saws benefit enormously from plates being smoothly finished and well polished, allowing for very fine set.
    Of course, if you get a rare and valuable saw, keep it as close to the original condition as you/it can afford.
    Cheers,
    S
    p.s. — don't be afraid to make mistakes, at least you won't be ruining a valuable saw.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2017
  13. Underthedirt

    Underthedirt Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    225
    This is a great subject, thanks for posting Rob...:)


    I categorise my saws into:

    1. Good user grade saws
    2. Unusual or uncommon saws
    3. Very old historical saws
    4. Possibly unique saws
    5. Junkers- parts

    Years ago at the start of my collecting, I tended to over clean my saws- stripping off patina off handles & polishing brass etc, soaking handles in BLO for a week to really load them up- thankfully the focus of my over zealous attention was restricted to mainly Henry Disstons later model offerings.


    Now I have learned to leave a patina on a handle- it looks fantastic & took over 100 years to develop, the same with brass, I've learned not to over clean it.


    I would go as far as to quote a very good friend of mine in saying that buffing & polishing the brass back & nuts of an early saw looks like "a boob job on a Grannie", it just doesn't look right.


    So now I try to do no harm & to sensitively restore a saw to a usable condition, taking rust off but not removing etches or stamps, cleaning but not scratching or sanding handles, repairing handles if required with period correct timbers- beech, apple etc, replacing missing fixings with correct fixings. I want the saw to look good & be usable.


    There are some exceptions - if the saw is super super old & or rare, I may not sharpen it to conserve plate depth, I would repair a missing horn or broken lambs tongue, & I always remove rust, if the plate has totally lost its tension, then the saw is unusable but may still be of interest if it's a rare saw.


    I don't like the idea of accentuating the repairs to an original saw, for the same reason I wouldn't leave a replacement fender on a vintage car a different colour so that everyone could see that it's a replacement- that doesn't work for me, although sometimes if the saw has a user made fixing that was replaced 30, 50, 80 or 130 years ago, I'll leave it- its part of the story of the saw.


    It's a very very subjective topic & everyone has their own opinion on their saws & can do as they like to their own, as Joe said, we are only the temporary caretakers of them...:)


    Regards


    Mari
     
    ray likes this.