Hello all, Harrison's are coming relatively thick and fast recently, but this one comes from the UK, not North America and is probably the earliest that I have seen going on the style of the egg shaped boss. What are we looking at, 1790 give or take 5 years? To say that it was not cheap would be a bit of an understatement. It has been over-cleaned but to be fair to the seller, he is not a dealer in tools and put a 99p start to the auction so I am pretty sure that he didn't know what he had. (I hope that I do know or it is a very expensive mistake). The handle has a bit of worm, and the blade is damaged, but this is the thing that interests me most about the saw, the fracture in the blade at the base of the handle. The blade at this point is nearly corroded through and light can be seen between the blade and the handle in places. This is in about the same position as the missing chunk of blade in an unnamed but equally early saw that I bought a while ago. (Final picture in the set). Which came first, the corrosion or the fracture? I am inclined to think that corrosion would have set in at the handle edge and then usage would allow the blade to flex in that area and eventually fracture/break. Are there any ideas on this? Fred
Congratulations on your Harrison, Fred. Sure looks like 1790 or earlier to me, but we all know what that fellow's opinion is worth. No dot in cast steel, which in this case should push the saw earlier. As to your break under the handle, I see that fairly frequently and have usually attributed it to the saw being dropped. Just my guess. But, anyway, bring on the Harrisons! David
Nice Fred The handles are almost identical. Both from the same seller? Your dating would seem pretty accurate. As David says about the breaks, I have also seen many with the crack from what I would expect to be a fall of some sort. Makes filing them real hard, if ya plan on that. Haha Had you shown us the stamp on the second one before? Love the first stamp. enjoy those babies Joe S.
Thank-you both for the replies, Sorry for replying late but I have been away for a while. To answer the easy bit first, the other old saw that I posted, Joe, does not have a name (and believe me, no-one has looked harder or more often than I have). I think that corrosion on the back has obliterated it as I sometimes think that I can see the shadow of a mark there. I have also scoured the plate as well, with the same disappointing result. As for the fractured bit at the back, I am still obsessed with corrosion forming some part of the process. I can quite see that dropping a saw may well damage the plate to the extent of distorting it. But it must be very difficult to drop such a light saw with sufficient force to fracture the plate, directly onto it at the back. Would not the handle give it a lot of protection from a direct impact. If corrosion was already there, then it could well be that a blow applied to the back of the plate whether directly (as a direct drop onto some unyielding object), or indirectly as in a blow after being bounced off the handle, would fracture an already weakened plate. This is really all academic as I am not going to try the experiments in order to find out. At least not with a saw of this lineage. I am sure that I must have some "also-rans" somewhere that would be willing to be sacrificed in a less than rigorously controlled experiment. Fred
The cracks in about the same spot is interesting... both appear to emanate from a gullet about the same distance from the heel and strike towards the handle. The handle is significant as (a) corrosion concentrates around that area due to acidic gunge accumulation and wicking of moisture between the handle and plate and (b) the hole in the plate for the nut imparts a weakness. There are no coincidences... suggests flexing or some change in the material properties of that region to promote the failure. I need to ponder this one a bit more... flexing and point loading of the plate between the gullet and the handle? Saws tend not to land on that place when dropped, but the heels do catch in some cuts. That is why there is a small angle at the heel of many saws. BTW this is why saw files have edges; sharp angle gullets promote cracking.
Thanks for the reply, Please ponder away. We both appear to be singing from the same hymn sheet (corrosion and flexing) but I lack practical experience with, or knowledge of, sawing and saw plates. I merely WAG and occasionally I get somewhere near the mark. At least I now know why the backs of some saw plates are angled and which has been done to this saw. It is possible/probable therefore that catching the heel in a cut may also have had a hand in the fracturing process. Or, of course, was put there in order to reduce the rate of fracturing once it had started. Fred
Is it just the Photo or is this saw sharpend the "wrong" way, for a pull stroke action? Maybe this caused the flex and breakage.
I am not overly good at discerning the various forms of teeth, and so I attach 4 images which make up almost the entire toothline for you to get a better look. It is very worn in places and unevenly cut so I don't know if it will be of much further help. In the image numbering, jpg.001 is at the front and 4 at the back. Fred
Aside from being an awful, awful sharpening job, the rake is close to a 'peg' profile so it cannot be considered a pull saw. The inconsistencies in the joint may have caused local strain partitioning but I'm sure the handle still has a role to play in the formation of the plate fracture.
Hi Fred, that Harrison is lovely. Just a question, how thick is the saw plate? Sometimes when cutting rebates / rabbets if someone is a little rough with a fine saw & if they push it through the end of the cut & run the saw off line, the heel can get a kink, straightening the kink on an anvil straightens the kink, but a weak spot is left, add the passage of time + use & more flexing, perhaps fatigue develops= crack. That's my 2 cents worth anyways. Regards Mari
Hi Mari, The plate is hovering around the 0.020 of an inch plus or minus a couple of thou on the Harrison and is the same on the other (unknown) saw that I have put up here as well. These measurements are taken with an electronic caliper and not a proper micrometer and so make of them what you will. Fred