Smithson Saw

Discussion in 'Forum: Saw Identification and Discussion' started by Deesinister, Sep 20, 2013.

  1. Deesinister

    Deesinister Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    60
    Hi all,
    I picked up this Smithson off ebay a few weeks ago.
    Nothing in HSMOB that I could find, perhaps a second line. Just wondering if any one had any Ideas.
    Three screws / nib and Three medallions would suggest it was old but I'm not convinced. What is interesting is that it has "Machine Ground" stamped upside under the Sheffield with no mention of the quality of the steel.
    It also has some Diagonalish marks on the back of the saw that seem deliberate rather than accidental. The steel is thick.

    Any help as always much appreciated.

    Cheers
    Al
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Sep 20, 2013
  2. TobyC

    TobyC Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    216
  3. Joe S

    Joe S Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    376
    Hey Al et al...
    "Second quality " or not, it certainly doesn't diminish the look of the saw. Robust to say the least. The handle is in wonderful looking shape but I always wonder how that someone before you could have placed the saw nuts on backwards when they were adjusted.
    Al, you can't also include pics of other saws like the second photo without further info.....
    Keep them coming.
    Joe S.
     
  4. Deesinister

    Deesinister Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    60
    Searching... :)

    I really should search this forum more before I post :).

    The other little saw is a Drabble and Sanderson. Very sweet but needs abit of tlc. Which I shall do when I get back.

    Toby you're absolutely right.
    The Smithson has some real heft. I dont have my calipers here but Id say the back of the saw is at just over 1mm thick to just under at the front and the condition of the steel is extremely good. Its going to make one hell of a user.

    I've added photos of the marks on the back which I think (though may be totally wrong) were guides for the grinding.

    Cheers
    Al
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Joe S

    Joe S Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    376
    Al
    The Smithson is nice, but the Drabble and Sanderson is "Sweet" and I am really glad you included it. There could be such an interesting session just on the user made saw covers and it really doesn't need a lot of TLC to make it a winner.
    very jealous
    Joe S.
     
  6. Barleys

    Barleys Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    546
    The Drabble & S saw and its beautifully made protective cover shows again how valuable these expensive tools were - many times the price of a chisel or a hammer.

    The high quality of the Smithson is no surprise when you have some of the 4th or 5th quality tools (eg Bowdon saws - Joseph Tyzack's 5th quality are excellent users). But there were certainly some appallingly cheap and nasty offeringsthat came out of the Sheffield industry... A handle attached by the maker with two wood screws only... I'll spare you sensitive people any other shudderful examples.

    Thick steel is almost certainly a sign of a cheaper saw - the more times the saw plate had to be passed through the rolls the more expensive - and thinner - it became.
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2013
  7. Deesinister

    Deesinister Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    60
    Thanks

    Hi All,

    The cover has had some work put into it to accommodate the bevel at the base of the spine and the chamfers on the handle. You're right Simon, Mr Earley (owners stamp) obviously valued it a great deal. Im intrigued to know what the horns at the toe of the cover are about.


    :)
     
  8. kiwi

    kiwi Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    355
    "...Im intrigued to know what the horns at the toe of the cover are about. "


    Looks a bit like the top piece is mis-aligned, (there should be a smooth curve for the boss of the handle), and that there is a piece missing at the end (like one side of a picture frame), with the "horns" being the remaining mitred corners ?
     
  9. Deesinister

    Deesinister Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    60
    Hi Kiwi,
    I didn't really make it clear in the photo but the top and bottom are separate pieces and do actually but up quite snugly to the cheek. I think you right about an end piece missing but cant for the life of me think how it would fit in. The only point i could see to it would be to hold the two main pieces together. Perhaps that part was attache to the lid of a tool trunk?. Who knows, but guessing is fun.
    Cheers
    Al