Just recently become interested in old saws and other tools. I found this saw the other day. I see Askham and Tasker listed in various places, but not together: 16" blade. Back is marked "ASKHAM & TASKER WARRANTED". 3 medalions, all say WARRANTED SUPERIOR, one is 3/4" with the knight on a horse, the other two are 9/16" with a crown coat-of-arms type design. 3 matching split-nuts. The upper edge of the back is not rounded, but rather has 3 flats, if that makes sense. Pictures attached. The back marking is hard to read. It says "ASKHAM & TASKER" in a semicircle, and "WARRANTED" to the lower right. Any estimates of age are appreciated! I gather it might be 1890's?? To make it look a little better, is it OK to do the following?: - Fine steel wool on the blade to remove the obvious rust, followed by a rubbing with gun oil. - Boiled linseed oil on the handle. - I read that removing the split-nuts is not a good idea... True? Pete
Hi, Welcome to the site. I really don't know about the date but I would put it in the 1860's for the following reasons. I have seen few chamfered backs later than the 1860's and I think that W/S medallions were not put on before the 1860's, although as always, I could be miles out on one or either. HSMOB has 3 Askhams but only two dates. Askham and Buxton C. 1850 Askham and Co. No date Askham, John 1879 to 1891 Now the only Tasker that there is, is Edward Tasker 1852 to 1855 who trades under Tasker and Co. If it is the same Tasker on your saw as is in HSMOB then this limits it to the late 1850's, but I think that this could be stretched a little to the 1860's. So I think that 1865 +/- a few years will be about right. (All WAGS gratefully refuted). As for cleaning saws I think that it is a matter of preference as long as no damage is done. Wire wool ( I use 0000 grade but it takes an awful lot of work to get anywhere an so I sometimes cheat with 000) is OK and it will take off the loose rust eventually. I have been known to start with 800 wet and dry and use WD 40 as a lubricant when I want to get thick rust off. As for preservation, because I am lazy I just use a beeswax based polish in a very fast solvent (toluene or similar) for both the handle and the blade. It doesn't give you the depth of protection for the blade that an oil will, but it has the advantage that you can just slap it on and polish it off. And of course it is easily removable with the appropriate solvent. Having said all that I see nothing wrong with your suggestions. Split nuts can be a problem, particularly if the handle has been loose and a groove has been worn by a blade in the shank. I have never got one of these past the blade without seriously damaging it. I don't think that it is generally a good idea to try to take them off, but if you feel so inclined, you could try and if the nuts come off easily and the screws come out without the application of too much force then it should be OK. If the screws are slightly stiff I try tapping the split nut end very lightly with an appropriately sized wooden dowel and a tack hammer. If that doesn't work, give up. There are other methods but these have always resulted with me in damage to the shank and the thread. Enjoy your saw and tool collecting. It is fascinating but can be addictive. Fred .
thanks! Thanks very much for your detailed response. I'm pleasantly surprised that it might be that old. I found it at an antique shop here in Colorado. He had several saws that had been left out in the weather, and had some fresh rust. The saws were $4 each, but he said "That's a good old one; it's $10". I don't plan to actually use it (have several "newer" models that work just fine), but I'll give it a good retirement home. Pete
Interesting one - thanks for giving it to us to see, Saipan. My impression is of a Sheffield saw made for the US market, because: 3 medallions are commoner on US export saws than domestic ones; the non-warranted superior medallion is meant to be St George and the Dragon - regularly, but much less often found than WS medallions, most frequently with the Brittain family, St G being our English patron saint. Secondly the name doesn't appear in the trades directories under the rubric "Sawmakers", suggesting a company name dreamed up for the US market (there are other examples, which I can't recall from memory). Thirdly, there are various Sheffield saw making companies which include the name Askham, starting with Frost, Askham & Mosforth in the 1840s (probably), becoming very soon just A&M until 1855, advertising a wide range of cutlery, as well as saws, files, and according to an advert in the 1856 directory, products "specially for the USA", which country Askham continued to visit until at least 1884 (information stolen from Geoff Tweedale's Directory of Sheffield Cutlers). Other Askham firms in the 1870-1880 period were Askham Brothers, and Askham and Greenfield - both were in steel, not saws predominantly, but like the earlier A&M, they would almost certainly have had their saws factored by a true sawmaker. There was also a Tasker, in various partnerships (none with Askham) around the 1850-1860 period. Partnerships were rapidly changing, and it is not impossible that Tasker was the person who made the saws for Askham, and got to put his name on them in this way. This design of saw is very difficult to date, as it changed little for several decades - anything from around 1860-1890 wouldn't surprise me, although the style of the lettering on the back is towards the later end, I think. I've seen the top chamfering on a Groves saw of late 19th cent - not a very helpful dating feature. As for cleaning, you pays your money and you takes your choice. I don't myself use anything more vicious than garnet paper on the steel (removes rust, but can't scratch steel), and a nylon abrasive square on the brass. For photographing marks I pick out the crud from the lettering. If you can afford it, get an off-beat product called Renaissance Wax, which was developed for museums for preserving everything (and I mean everything). Health warning: collecting saws is dangerously addictive!