Saw Handles are like snowflakes...

[Alf]

... no two are ever the same. At least they aren't in my workshop. :roll: I took these more with Mike in mind, he being just a leetle bit tuned in to saw handles for some reason :lol: , but then I thought what the heck, someone else might be interested too.

First up, here are the three saws I sharpened last week. Top to bottom: a 14" Tyzack, Sons & Turner that I managed to do Bad Things to when I first started learning to sharpen; the Brookes saw I bought last weekend (this is a record turnaround from purchase to usable state :shock: ); and a 14" by Constantine Brothers I got about three weeks ago. Hmm, that would have been a record turnaround but for the Brookes...



Then today I came home with this (yes, I think we can safely say the saw problem is Back ):



You can see where I've cleaned a bit of the back to try and decipher the maker - alas, totally invisible except for "& Son/s" and "Sheffield" stamped about three times as heavily. Well that narrows it down to about 300 possibilities then... :roll: The think about it though is the handle. The grip is really rather small; here it is compared to the Tyzack:



I can get all four fingers round the Tyzack; this one just takes three beautifully. In fact it fits my hand like a glove. Too bad it doesn't fit the saw. :?



You should be able to make out it's been morticed for a much thicker and deeper back - possibly a larger saw altogether? I wonder what happened? Did the previous owner just bung on the nearest spare when the original bust? Or did he too find that handle so comfy he felt it worthwhile transferring it to a new saw? 'Course we'll never know, but it's oh-so-tempting to have a shot at making one to that pattern myself - but with a better fit for the back. :wink:

Cheers, Alf

 

[MikeW]

Ooh. Lovely and thank you for the great side shots. Makes for easy pattern making that.

The Brookes is similar in shape as the handle of the so called panel saws in the Seaton chest, made by John Kenyon. 26" blade length, so not what we commonly call a panel saw. Lovely handle.

Ah, another saw, Alf? They are addicting, at least for me.

The ill-fitted back. One can also clean out the mortise to provide a good glue bond and fit wood shims made from a donor saw with "patina" to the wood that itself is beyond messing with. Probably less time to make a new handle, but it is an option. Two screws may indicate the handle is an older one.

It does look like the handle is on a "new" saw. The hang to mortise angle looks like the handle is at a steeper angle than would have been. Dunnno. Neat saw, though. Lovely lamb's tongue.

Thanks for the pictures.

Take care, Mike

 

[Alf]

Ooh. Lovely and thank you for the great side shots. Makes for easy pattern making that.

Don't hesitate to yell if you want any other info.

The Brookes is similar in shape as the handle of the so called panel saws in the Seaton chest, made by John Kenyon. 26" blade length, so not what we commonly call a panel saw. Lovely handle.

Mmm, it is rather - the London pattern doesn't seem to vary that much over time. Bit plainer though - I do wonder if it was a second quality saw as it happens.

Ah, another saw, Alf? They are addicting, at least for me.

Apparently for me too

The ill-fitted back. One can also clean out the mortise to provide a good glue bond and fit wood shims made from a donor saw with "patina" to the wood that itself is beyond messing with. Probably less time to make a new handle, but it is an option.

Never occurred to me, but I could... :-k Have to see what happens if the Tuit ever turns up

Two screws may indicate the handle is an older one.

Yeah, I wondered about that. Looks like I could have an opportunity to see how two screws stand up to modern saw users myself then! :wink:

It does look like the handle is on a "new" saw. The hang to mortise angle looks like the handle is at a steeper angle than would have been. Dunnno.

I have the feeling it's the sort of handle angle I'd expect on a much bigger backsaw, but the grip's so much smaller. I dunno either, but half the fun is speculating. :lol:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Alf]

Took the handle off and - surprise, surprise- a wide range of holes from which to choose. :lol:



Cheers, Alf

 

[MikeW]

Yep, the person must have really liked that handle--or the blade. Your choice today.

The blade looks like it was a 3-hole.

And the handle looks like it was modified by cutting down the area of the back's mortise. Maybe. Perhaps. Love the mystery, though.

The person was probably not unlike us. Have a saw? Broke the handle? Well, car boot it is for a donor saw that has an intact handle with a bad blade and swap 'em out.

Well, ok. Probably not a car boot. Both the blade and the handle is a bit old for that, but the salvaging of tools has been going on for as long as there have been tools.

And you are the next-gen

Thanks, Mike

 

[Chris Knight]

Alf,

I see a shorter saw in your future..

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Gee Alf, I posted a similar item to the Oldtools Forum just a short while ago. The whole area of tote design is something I find quite fascinating. It seems to me that at some point in time - the 50s? Earlier? - everything started to look square. Gone were the lovely curves and rounded grips. Even LN have produced a "photocopy" of the Groves dovetail saw. And, as with photocopies, some detail gets lost along the way.

Here is a picture of the LN and Groves:

I’ve been wanting a small tenon saw for a while. Something smaller than my Disston #5. Something about the same size as my LN Independence dovetail saw (which has a blade of 9”) but filed crosscut and 15 tpi for more delicate, smoother shoulder cuts.

About a year ago I made another of my derelict purchases, this time a Spear & Jackson tenon saw with 10" long x 2 1/4" deep blade. Over the months that followed I began to think about the tote design. Here was a chance to design and build something that I found both aesthetically pleasing as well as comfortable. I wanted round, not flat. I wanted curves and flow.


Here is what I came up with. Firstly, a picture of the original tote and the complete saw for comparison. New tote is Jarrah.

And here is a better angle for inspection.

This is the most comfortable tote I have ever used.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Alf]

Mmmmmm, curvy. Proper job, Derek. =D> I've got a couple of older back saws that have the most gorgeous curvy handles - in both cases the blades have had it though, so I just get to hold them sometimes instead of using them.

Anyway, must be something in the air... I've spent the whole of today making a copy of the handle in walnut. You know how usually I try to stress that such-and-such a task isn't as difficult as it looks? Well as far as I'm concerned saw handle making is much more difficult. 8-[ Mike earns every red cent he makes and all power to him. :lol: In fact it's so bad I'm not sure I'll even post a pic of it when it's done.

Oh, and there's another hole in the blade now, btw... :roll: :lol:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Chris Knight]

Derek,
That is a very educational picture (Groves vs LN)! The difference is very noticeable in terms of the nice smooth transitions from curve to curve around the handle.

I wonder, just how evident it is to the feel of the handle. I think the LN handles are pretty comfortable - unlike say a modern mass produced back saw where the sides of the handle seem to transition to a curve across a sharp arris - and of course where the overall shape is generally crude in the extreme

 

[Paul Chapman]

That's a cracking handle, Derek =D>

Paul

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

must be something in the air... I've spent the whole of today making a copy of the handle in walnut. You know how usually I try to stress that such-and-such a task isn't as difficult as it looks? Well as far as I'm concerned saw handle making is much more difficult. Mike earns every red cent he makes and all power to him

.

Alf

You are so right. Although in my case it only took about an hour to whittle this one ... nah, I'm only kidding :lol: I too spent a whole day at it. This work is incredibly time-demanding. It requires handskills - that is why there are so many saws out there today that look machine-made. That was my original point. Skill aside, we really sell time, and we must be prepared to pay for this. I think that Mike's saws are basically cheap at the price (unfortunately, perception of value-for-money is another matter altogether).

That is a very educational picture .... I wonder, just how evident it is to the feel of the handle.

Chris

Interesting pic comparison, isn't it. My LN is a comfortable saw. However, unless you used something better, you would not recognise its limitations. Since the LN had become a baseline for excellence, this design has become accepted as good. On the other hand, I have seen some of Mike's with far better proportions, so perhaps the standard will now change!

Mike's saws:

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Alf]

Anyone with time to kill may amuse themselves with listing all the things wrong with this - feel free to keep the list to yourself though, eh? I'm pretty familiar with all its faults already. #-o And this is the good side...

Back to chisel handles for little ol' me... :lol:

Cheers, Alf

 

[MikeW]

Mucho better than the former and looks a lot more comfortable.

What's not to like about that?

And besides. It'll last another 150 years--or more.

Take care, Mike

 

[Paul Chapman]

Alf,

Looks alright to me :? :?

Paul

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Anyone with time to kill may amuse themselves with listing all the things wrong with this

Yeah, Alf

(1) I hate the fact that the grain is running in the correct direction.

(2) I hate the fact that the the edges are nicely rounded.

(3) It is probably very comfortable. That is unforgivable.

(4) It looks considerably better than the original. Someone is spinning in a grave.

(5) Nice .... just awful .. lines.

(6) Awful, just awful. (Can't think of something negative).

(7) Terrible .. did I mention awful?

Alf, what are you talking about?! That is a delightful tote. Gad, you have high standards! :lol:

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Alf]

Argh, but the back doesn't line up with the top edge and the chamfer's all wrong there too (you should see the other side) and I'm not sure about the hang angle at all and the lamb's tongue hasn't the proper curve to it and...

Well the worst of it is it's just not as comfortable as the original. I'll have another go at it when I can face it again.

But thanks chaps, I feel a bit better.

Cheers, Alf