Hello all, I must start off by saying that this saw has suffered the attentions of someone who likes wielding a big hammer with more enthusiam than skill. And after all the work done,they still haven't staightened it. The blade is 22 inches long. HSMOB has three Robert Sorby's Robert Sorby 1833 to 1839 Robert Sorby and Son 1841 Robert Sorby and Sons 1847 to 1985 (Kangaroo Brand) Now this is relatively easy, because the saw has the Kangaroo mark impressed into it and is presumably post 1847. This is therefore in the "and Sons" period. Now I have not seen many Robert Sorby saws but I have had a number if chisels and gouges through my hands and I cannot recollect seeing an "and Sons" mark on them, just as there is not one on this. Has anyone seen a Sorby "and Sons" tool of any description? This also looks to me to be one of those "early style/later saw" specemins. It could easily be an early Sorby, flat bottom to the handle, two screws at 7/16th inch and a nice rounded nose. That is until you come to the "German Steel" stamp on it. The German steel would imply that it is a lesser quality saw and unless you are very lucky a later saw, in this case mimicking an earlier style. ( The kangaroo clinches it). The handle is 7/8th inch thick which also is (if I have read the comment correctly) an indicator of a second/third rate saw on the Barley scale of tat identification. Simon also mentioned in one of his replies about one of Joe's saws that there were so few examples of very early saws around. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that much the same can be said about pre 1850 - ish saws. I have just articulated Fred's golden rule of saw dating,- Never mind how old it looks, unless it has a mark that can incontrovertably be only pre 1850, then assume the worst - it will prevent disappointment later. And if you really want to be safe (pessimistic), assume 1880 to 1900. Fred
Hi Fred, The smilies are on the right hand side of the edit box, the ones underneath the edit box are icons for the message. You can always just type Code: :) in your text, and it will automatically be rendered as a smilie. Back to your Robert Sorby, that's another interesting one.. Stamped mark, two screws, early looking handle. I take it that the Kangaroo mark is the faint mark above the cross? Interesting hang angle, the flat is actually angled down? Regards Ray PS... I edited the smilie in your original post, hope you don't mind.
Hello Ray, Thanks for the reply. A lot of my handsaw flats are angled down slightly, but this one is particularly pronounced. As for hang angle, it is nowhere near the centre of the blade. Bearing in mind that my right hand index finger came off second best in an arguement with a circular saw blade a few years ago, then my hang angle may not necessarily be your hang angle. But as far as I can make out the line down my index finger comes out just below the nib on the cutting edge at best and on the top of the saw's nose at worst. Having just tried cutting with it and (bearing in mind my ignorance of joinery is equalled only by my ignorance of saws - I am learning though), you seem to get a disproportionate amount of downward force on the last 1/4 / 1/5th of the blade. Does this make sense? Fred
Hey Fred et al I too would have placed that saw in the earlier time period until you start rhyming all the reasons that really place it in a later period. I love the " Fred's golden rule","I have just articulated Fred's golden rule of saw dating,- Never mind how old it looks, unless it has a mark that can incontrovertably be only pre 1850, then assume the worst - it will prevent disappointment later. And if you really want to be safe (pessimistic), assume 1880 to 1900." It is still a cool saw and obviously well loved. I could imagine it being a tough saw to work with that pronounced hang. I wonder if that was why there are cracks around the upper screw with all the pressure being exerted in order to get it to work.... I can say I also have never seen "and sons". ...Why waste a perfectly good stamp... cheers Joe
Hi All, It could be that the saw blade and handle have come together later, this would explain the hang. and could also explain the 2 fixings on a saw that has a stamp from post 1847. One way to check this would be to remove the handle, and see what holes lie beneath. If you do go down this method be very careful, the old brass threads don't like being put under lots of pressure, and easily can strip. Is that more snow I can see in the background, spring obviously hasn't arrived yet in Scotland. cheers lui
The Sheffield saw industry (like most Sheffield industries) turned out some very inferior products at the bottom end of their ranges... Robert Sorby (the three in HSMOB are just continuations of the original firm - it's still going, making quite good quality turning tools) was one of the big ones, making a huge range of tools themselves, hence what is probably their 6th quality here - two screws only, German steel, London pattern handle (7/8ths thickness was the usual on all saws except the very cheapest backsaws or very small toy saws - sorry if I was misleading in a previous post), and the non-Kangaroo TM, which here is a Maltese Cross, one of this firm's other marks. And concurring with Fred's Law, I think this could well be of the 1880-1900 period. The kangaroo TM was an acknowledgement of their vast export trade down under, but it wasn't used on the lesser quality tools. I would be surprised if any very good woodwork could be done with this tool. Oh dear. Still - we have to see these bottom quality items, as they were all part of the trade, and each one has something of interest. Best wishes Simon
Thank-you Joe, Lui and Simon for the replies, Something has definitely gone wrong with the top screw fixing as it is now a steel bolt with a small head and a screw thread. I wonder, Joe, if it ever was loose in the handle it could pivot slightly on the bottom screw and with the angle of the handle, put undue pressure on the top one. I suspect that we will never know but it is a plausible speculation. I daren't take the screws off, Lui as I only have a couple of spare 7/16th ones and I want to use those on a backsaw that I have that has two missing. If I ever get any more, I will give it a go as I really would like to know. This, actually is my sort of saw. It is built for one who is impatient and wants to get the job done quickly, so you start off with not much pressure on the cut at the saw tip or even in the first 1/3rd / towards the centre of the blade, as you know that if you do you will be prone to kink the blade straight away. (I have done it many a time). But when you get towards the back of the blade which is wider and more robust, you can really give it some wellie. This handle is perfect for that. (Apologies to all who take pride in their woodwork). This has probably been its fate, because most of the hammer marks are between the nib and the trade mark. Someone has tried to put too much force into the cut too early, kinked the blade and then tried to hammer it straight again. It looks like on many an occaision. When I bought this saw (at a car boot sale and for those of you who know the pricing structure at such places may realise that I did not pay the earth for it), I did think that it was an early-ish saw, for the simple reason that Robert Sorby, particularly in the line of chisels and gouges is synonymous with quality and I could not conceive of him/them making an inferior quality saw. When I got home I then noticed the "German Steel", started to apply Simon's criteria for the "also rans" of the saw world and realised that this was an "also ran". One thing that is confusing me Simon, if you read this, is that you say that "the Kangaroo trade mark was an aknowledgement of their vast export trade down under, but it wasn't used on their lesser quality tools". This is definitely a lesser quality tool with the Sorby cross, but just above it there is the remnant of the Kangaroo trade-mark. I suppose it depends how far down the quality order you go before the kangaroo disappears. So there may be some hope for my saw yet. Do you know if the "German Steel" stamp was used as late as the late 19th century. Ray has it on his timeline until 1900 but I thought that it was phased out a little earlier. After Bessemer, I presume that most previous steel quality marks would be redundant. Again thanks for the replies, Fred
Thanks for the extra info, Fred. I hadn't realised that the marks above the Maltese cross represented a kangaroo. I could well be wrong in saying they omitted the beast on the lowest qualities, as I am away from home, and had in mind a medallion on a low quality saw which has the cross only. I've been puzzled previously, though, by discrepancies between real saws (photos of) and catalogue descriptions, and am uncertain how to interpret them. There are several R Sorby catalogues in the Hawley collection, but probably not all that were issued, which may be one explanation; the other may be that this was a big firm, turning out probably many thousands of saws annually, and it could well be that markings were not consistent, the task being unskilled and perhaps consigned to the apprentices. It could also be that some saws were made by other Sheffield firms for Sorby, and marked in another works (if, for instance, Sorby had an unusually big order to fill, and a ship waiting to sail at Liverpool docks), and the other firm didn't have the requisite marks to hand or were uncertain what to put on anyway (they would have had my sympathy). I once went with Ken Hawley to a rule-making factory in Birmingham which had closed down and was being cleared out, and under a bench, covered with dust and grime, we found a big box full of marks for most of the 19th century tool-making firms - William Marples etc etc. This saw also illustrates something else I've not seen a good explanation for, which is the difference in depth between the marking of most of the name/TM/town, and that of the quality of the steel, which marking is very often much less deep. Was the type of steel marked later, after the saw plate had passed through some stages of manufacture, and was no longer in the relatively soft, annealed early stage (when paring and toothing was done) and had gone on to being hardened and tempered? I can't see why marking the type of steel should be delayed, as presumably it was known right from the start what it was. Answers eagerly awaited! German steel (which I take to be cementation steel put through further forging, to improve the diffusion of the carbon into the iron) was I believe used right through the 19th and maybe into the early 20th cent for saws, which were accordingly so marked. I don't think Bessemer cast steel was used for tools, as it was low carbon (0.2% or so) and was used as a replacement for wrought iron (rails, bridges etc), not for crucible cast steel. The steel industry took huge technical strides forward in the last 25 years of the 19th cent, with new types of special steel, alloy steels etc and a big increase in academic research, which revealed the theory behind much that had been empirically derived good practice. The hang of this saw could I think have been altered when the top screw was messed about with - the handle being slightly proud of the steel isn't something that would be allowed to pass from the factory even on a lesser quality tool. So I imagine the handle was rotated slightly upwards (clockwise, looking at it from the usual side), which has altered the hang. I would guess that a previous owner tried taking out the top screw and found - like the rest of us who try these things - that he couldn't get the screw to bite on the nut again, and put in the steel replacement. If Fred could bring himself to take the handle off (not sure I could) it might be revealed that there is a second, previously used, hole in the saw plate. I sometimes think that the main force keeping the handle and blade together on old saws is the accumulation of rust inside.
I have a sorby with the handle off at the moment, I'll try and take some picture next weekend, and post them here. My saw is not a london pattern, but the holes are interesting. regards lui
Here's the Sorby without the handle, as you can see one of the holes is on the edge of the blade. regards lui