Hi all, I have a question for the group, the reason for which will become obvious in a moment. The question is, does anyone know if British saws were typically sharpened before leaving the factory, or was that left up to the new owner to do? The saw pictured below is a J. Taylor & Son 28 1/2" rip saw that I recently acquired. As I've started cleaning the saw up, I've found it to be a remarkable specimen. Not remarkable for it's age or the maker, but for one simple fact: I don't believe the saw has ever been sharpened, either at the factory or subsequently. The evidence for this is: 1) the wide plate measuring 7 7/8" at the heel and 2 3/4" at the toe; 2) The teeth are so perfectly formed that they appear to be made by a machine. Starting at the heel, the first 20 1/4" is 4 ppi, the next 5" is 4 1/2 ppi, and the final 3 1/4" is 5 ppi. I've known some very good saw sharpeners, and I sharpen myself, but I've rarely seen teeth so precisely uniform as these, especially on an old saw. 3) Examining the edges of the teeth under high magnification, there are no file marks. The edges are smooth as if sheared in a press. The teeth are lightly set, but not as much as one would want for normal use. A setting, light jointing, and final filing would be all that's needed to have the saw cutting well. The original screws have all been replaced by modern ones, and I suspect they were robbed to put on another saw. The upper horn has been broken off, probably from dropping, and is glued back on. The saw may have been lightly used, even though I'm 99% certain it has never been sharpened. I find it amazing that a saw could be made in Sheffield, find it's way to America, kick around for 100 years or more, and never be sharpened. That does appear to be the case though. I'm guessing this saw was made around the last decade of the 19th century or early years of the 20th, but others may know better than me. Bob
Hi Bob, You really need Simon or one of the sawmakers that use this site for this but I will have a guess, bearing in mind that my technical knowledge of saws is next to zero and so it will be a learning experience for me as well when the correct answer comes. For starters it is a lovely saw and, as you say probably lightly used or unused. Why do you need to file the cutting surface of a rip saw tooth after pressing the teeth? On a crosscut, the rake is put in when the teeth are pressed and the filing is for the fleam. (I hope I have got these two right and not the wrong way round). I don't think that you file the rake on manufacture. Do you?? On a rip the teeth are cut at right angles to the run of the blade and I don't see what advantage filing the cutting face of the teeth would give. You may have to file to remove burrs but that would be at the side of the teeth. When you need to sharpen you then have to file because you cannot re-cut. Please tell me if this is absolute twaddle. Fred As an aside, there is a video of a professional saw filer at the Kelham Island Museum and it is a joy to watch. On what I think must be the final "tickling up" he goes down the length of the saw with one file stroke per tooth, probably doing more than one tooth a second. It is remarkable.
Hi Fred, On a rip saw, the cutting takes place at the very tip of the tooth, each tooth serving as a little chisel. I've never seen freshly stamped teeth, but I would assume they are not as sharp, or as flat across the tip, as one would want for cutting. Also, after the teeth are set, one would want to file them so the tips of the teeth are perpendicular to the saw plate in order to get the most efficient chiseling action. At least that's how I think about it. I'd love to see that Kelham Island video. Is it online, and do you have a link? Bob
Hi Bob, As I said, I know nothing of the technicalities of saw making but what you say about filing the set teeth perpendicular sounds reasonable. Which is why we really need a sawmaker to answer this. The video from Kelham Island is probably not online, although Simon (who has a lot to do with the place) would be able to say for sure. Ken Hawley, the man who the collection is named after is, shall we say, a little idiosyncratic and may reject such practices. I seem to remember in one reply by Simon on this site that he could not reproduce an image from the museum owing to copyright. You should see the proper saw smithing hammers (not dog nosed ones - much more complex), and the proper saw smiths' anvil. (As I remember it the top is slightly convex, I don't know why though). However, if you , or indeed anyone ever get the chance to visit it is well worthwhile. Here is a link to an item by Ray about it. http://www.backsaw.net/index.php?option=com_jfusion&Itemid=58&jfile=showthread.php&t=119 Fred
I was having a root through part of my collection this weekend and came across this Sorby that I had forgotten that I had it. It is a fair bit later than yours, but it has been filed. The interesting thing is that the teeth are not filed straight across at the top but are filed on the slant to a virtual point on the outside of the tooth. You cannot see the file marks properly on the pictures but they have definitely been filed as have the teeth proper and the gullets. I don't think that the saw has had that much use, and so it may be the filing upon manufacture. Can anyone tell me what the advantage is of filing the teeth pointed (sloping) like this and not straight across? Fred
Wow Fred Nice saw. I would say in virtually untouched condition. Looks like someone bought it, probably tried it a couple of times and put it away. On a cross cut, as this is, the "fleam" when filed at an angle creates the knife edges that efficiently severs cross grain wood fibres. Straight across rip isn't as efficient when cutting across the grain. It can be done but takes longer. Hope this helps a little. There is lots of info on saw geometry out there. Joe S.
J Taylor & Son Considering that there are written instructions on how to sharpen a saw that run to many pages, and that there are multiple different written instructions and that I myself have a better chance of jumping over the moon than I have of sharpening a saw (even badly), I can offer only some disjointed (sorry) remarks based on reading and watching Derek Taylor, the man Fred mentions in the video, who incidentally learned his saw making at Slack Sellars after 1945. I once bought a 36inch one man cross cut from him when he was running the Garlick business, and he sharpened it in a flash - one stroke of the file only on each tooth, not doing a final tickling up, which I suspect no saw maker did simply because they always worked by the piece, so you didn't hang about doing any tickling. Incidentally, Derek, now alas long retired, having sold his business to Thomas Flinn, was a superb saw sharpener, and I have got 20 years of excellent use from some of the saws that went through his hands. I have met a couple of saw sharpeners who were possibly even better, and I'm sure they were able to produce a saw as good as the lovely one that Fred showed - in fact it's not impossible that Derek made that, because when R Sorby were selling saws with that transfer (so Ken Hawley has told me, because he saw them in the Garlick works), their saws were actually being made for them by Garlick (1960s). Some suggested answers: in the Joseph Wilson records (1768-1775) he certainly sold saws not sharpened (at a cheaper price), but I don't think there is documentation of the habit continuing - which is not to say it didn't. The price statements for the saw grinders (ie the amount they were paid per dozen) show that the wider the plate the more they were paid, and the widest at the heel were 8 5/8inches (the 28 and 30 inch handsaws). Terminology: saw teeth were pared, not stamped or pressed. After paring, which was one of the first processes, when the plate was pared to shape as well, and the steel was still in its softer, annealed state before hardening and tempering etc. The paring left fash (ragged edges of steel), which was rapidly filed off both the edges of the plate. I think the paring could leave a surface as crisp as Bob suggests, esp if the die was a new and high quality one. The chairmaker John Brown told me he usually ran his file down the sides of the blade as the final bit of sharpening, to reduce the set a bit and take care of any fash. The teeth on Bob's saw are incremental, as he describes; frequent on rippers. Is it the distortion of the photo, or is it breasted? (a sign of quality). Is it really 28 1/2 inches long? It's a fair guess that anything other than the exact standard lengths has been got at post manufacture, but there a several exceptions in the Hawley and my Collections. Bob seems to be implying that an "old" saw is surprising to have such beautifully cut teeth, but turning that round, this is a saw that was made in a factory where men specialised and did these jobs day after day and nothing else maybe for 50 years - they were b****y good at it! Especially if the saw was one of their top quality, which might cost a man a couple of weeks' wages to buy. Judging by the colour of the varnish (which may of course not be original) I wonder if this is maybe from the 1930s, a time when Sheffield was still turning out some very fine top quality tools (and a vast amount of ghastly cheap stuff at the bottom end of the market). And top quality saws specifically for hard woods were catalogued as lightly set. Finally, Derek once gave us at the Hawley Collection a list of the setting and sharpening time for workmen, based on piece work and bonus prices for a 50 hour week (1957), as agreed with the Unions: 20-22in 10tp - 25-30 per hour (straight sharpened) 24-26in 6 or 7 tpi 30-35 per hour X sharpened (ie turned round) - 10-12 and 12-15 per hour. Backsaws straight sharpened - up to 50 per hour for 13 tpi, down to 37 for an 8in 20tpi Hand setting was 25-35 per hour, depending on size (after 1945 most backsaws were machine set) PS If you are selling an item on ebay and wish to quote any of the above, please could you acknowledge the source?
Great information, Simon. Thank you. The saw is indeed breasted. Good observation. The plate is exactly 28 1/2", but there is no visible indication it has ever been shortened, and I don't believe it has been. Being lightly or never used, it is doubtful anyone would have put the effort into shortening it. My theory on the screws is that the saw may have originally had multiple medallions like some saws exported to the US had. This would have been one large, and perhaps one or more small medallions, but who knows. These must have been too great a temptation for someone, and they removed them to put on another saw. Whatever it's history, I think it is a pretty neat old saw. Simon, if I understand the figures on sharpening times correctly, it is astounding. Roughly two minutes on average for setting and sharpening a rip saw? Wow! Their hands must have been a blur. Bob