# Dovetail Saw- new or vintage?



## inandout (20 Apr 2008)

Having recently taught myself to sharpen a dovetail saw (using various links from these forums) my questions are, if I tune up an old vintage dovetail saw will it ever be as good as a Wenzloff, Lie Nielsen Adria etc. Is there any inherent deficiency in the metal of vintage saws compared to modern day ones. Is there a particular vintage maker (pistol grip) that is recommended?

Thanks.

Andrew


----------



## neilyweely (20 Apr 2008)

I believe there are folk here who will disagree with me but I asked a friend
who is a college tutor (carpentry and bench joinery) about picking up an old S and J or Diston saw, and he steered me well away for precisely the reason you stated.
Apparently the steel used in the old chisels etc is superior to the new ones, but as far as saws are concerned he said the new hardpoint saws are better and cheaper than the old ones. Of all the tutors at the college he is the one with the most experience, and although this is doubtless an opinion (and a controversial one at that) it must bear some weight.


----------



## dunbarhamlin (21 Apr 2008)

Suspect your chum was thinking about Japanese saws - disposable, brrom stick handle, cut backwards. They're fashionable. Not Tetley's.

Andrew, since you can sharpen the saw, durability is a none issue. After the first sharpening, I don't see that there would be any difference - then it's just whether you like the feel of the handle.
The main thing would be finding an example where the plate hadn't been too badly abused


----------



## bugbear (21 Apr 2008)

inandout":3t6lh33v said:


> Having recently taught myself to sharpen a dovetail saw (using various links from these forums) my questions are, if I tune up an old vintage dovetail saw will it ever be as good as a Wenzloff, Lie Nielsen Adria etc.



Probably not as good as a new saw, fresh from the makers; all 3 are beautifully sharpened. However, after the first resharpen you do, it's now you, not them, and things are more equal. None of them offer (AFAIK) a resharpening service.



> Is there any inherent deficiency in the metal of vintage saws compared to modern day ones. Is there a particular vintage maker (pistol grip) that is recommended?



I'm assuming you mean Western (European) DT saws; no, the steel is very similar. In terms of old saws, look for a comfortable handle (easy to evaluate, at least in person), and a straight blade (very hard to fix). Beware of loose handles, although this can be remedied.

A GOOD vintage DT saw at car boot should be 10 quid (max); 20 quid online from a specialist dealer. This is a huge saving over the brands you mention.

If you're patient, you may get a bargain; this was a quid, although I did restore it ...







BugBear


----------



## kenneth cooke (23 Apr 2008)

The picture you posted looks like a lovely old saw but they cannot match the performance of the modern super saws now available. Last year I bought a Lei- Neilsen dovetail saw and a Lei- Neilsen small carcass saw. They are superb and i would not be without them. Also the dovetail saw is sharpened from the factory and set for rip cut which is the true orientation of dovetails. Most older saws were sharpened and set cross cut which is the wrong orientation.

By all means I would sharpen your old saw and set it cross cut for use as a small carcass saw and buy one of the modern supersaws. David Charleswoth has reviewed many of these saws in his book


----------



## Joe (23 Apr 2008)

I'd like to reiterate Bugbear's point: sooner or later you are going to have to sharpen your Lie-Nielsen dovetail saw and then it will be no better than a good vintage saw that you've also sharpened yourself. 

As for hardpoint saws, they last longer but you can't modify the tooth geometry to suit your purposes and once they're dull you have to chuck them away (or turn them into scrapers). I dislike the idea of disposable tools.

Joel


----------



## bugbear (23 Apr 2008)

Joe":1m6mw041 said:


> As for hardpoint saws



I've never seen a western European style hard point dovetail saw...

BugBear


----------



## Anonymous (23 Apr 2008)

My experience (await the people who decry this) is that old saws are not as good as the manufacturers you mention and will not remain sharp fpr as long, probably have slightly bent or pitted blades which can cause them to 'grab' during the cut, and cost only £10-20 + some time sharpening them. 
I would not buy an old saw again.

For that matter, old chisels are not as good as modern AIs, LNs, Bluesprce etc., and old planes are not as good LNs, LVs and Cliftons.


I don't have a pair of rose tinted spectacles, I buy tools to use, not because I have an interest in tools or collecting them, and manufacturing processe and materials understanding has moved on somewhat in the last 10 years, never mind the last 100

Older kit is usually cheaper, and works fine though.


----------



## bugbear (23 Apr 2008)

kenneth cooke":s17kex95 said:


> The picture you posted looks like a lovely old saw but they cannot match the performance of the modern super saws now available. Last year I bought a Lei- Neilsen dovetail saw and a Lei- Neilsen small carcass saw. They are superb and i would not be without them. Also the dovetail saw is sharpened from the factory and set for rip cut which is the true orientation of dovetails. Most older saws were sharpened and set cross cut which is the wrong orientation.



Well, any saw "as found" is likely to be dirty and fairly blunt; further (as you say) some old saws were sharpened cross cut, although by no means all. Saws in this condition are clearly inferior to the "super" saws you mention.

However, since I taught myself the skill, a saw that I have sharpened has the teeth how I want them, at least within the limits of my skill.

And any of the saws you mention will also be limited by my skill after the first resharpen.

So where does this performance difference come from?

BugBear


----------



## Racers (23 Apr 2008)

Hi,

In the old days they didn't know (or understand) how to make tools cheaply so the quality was better, now they know how to engineer things only just good enough, most tools are rubbish, giving room for TLN etc to produce good tools matching the old stuff if not exceeding it in some cases (fancy steel chisels etc) but saws are just a piece of O1 Steel with teeth filled in so I don't see why they can't compare. And as Bugbear says you get to learn a new skill. I wounder who is going to sharpen the LN etc saws?


Pete


----------



## Joe (23 Apr 2008)

bugbear":ddisq5hk said:


> I've never seen a western European style hard point dovetail saw...
> 
> BugBear



Good point (forgive the pun). I think all hardened, western style back saws are described as tenon saws aren't they?



> For that matter, old chisels are not as good as modern AIs, LNs, Bluesprce etc., and old planes are not as good LNs, LVs and Cliftons.



I'm not convinced this comparison is really valid. Whereas modern chisels might be made with better steel (such as A2) and have superior flatness (as supplied from the factory), and modern planes can have all sorts of advantages (ductile iron, flatter soles, squarer sides, more stable frogs, etc.), I can't see how you can really improve on an old Disston saw (for example) in good condition, other than using better quality steel. But do we know this to be the case? Afterall, a Disston saw blade has a similar Rockwell C rating to a Lie-Nielsen.

Joel

p.s. Mind you Tony, if I was given the choice between a brand new LN saw and a vintage saw, FOC, I think I know which one I'd go for...


----------



## kenneth cooke (23 Apr 2008)

I take Joe's point but I would say to Joe- Have you tried one of these new breed of saws?. I have and there is no comparison with vintage saws the new ones are in another league. And yes, vintage planes are only superior to modern mass produced ones because of the seasoning and quality of the casting used hence they remain flat once lapped. but I would always install one of the new breed of iron into any vintage plane

If money were not a consideration I would happily re stock my workshop with modern equivalents of vintage tools.

I would keep the old tools because of their link to the past and the thought of the craftsmen that have used them before me. 

I was lucky enough to get hold of a 1914 Stanley USA Bedrock 604c last year in near mint condition. The brazilian rosewood handle and tote are magnificent and the sole needed very little lapping. I did however fit it out with a new Ray Illes iron


----------



## Joe (23 Apr 2008)

kenneth cooke":1ez7pbwz said:


> If money were not a consideration I would happily re stock my workshop with modern equivalents of vintage tools.
> 
> I would keep the old tools because of their link to the past and the thought of the craftsmen that have used them before me.



I'm largely in agreement with you on both those points Kenneth. The only other issue that I think is a consideration in relation to using old tools is an environmental one - i.e. less energy consumed in recycling something than making a new one (and importing it). But I'm certainly a fan of well made modern hand tools!

Joel


----------



## Anonymous (24 Apr 2008)

kenneth cooke":3p6beiiz said:


> .
> 
> I would keep the old tools because of their link to the past and the thought of the craftsmen that have used them before me.



I think this sums it up nicely., old tools are not better than good quality modern tolls (often extremely inferior), but they have a history and a romance about them (I have some 1830s hollows and rounds that I absolutely love), and they are cheaper 

I do not consider the fact that they are cheaper to necessarily be a plus though as I will be using the tools for (hopefully) another 30 years, and £200 on a LN plane with a lifetime guarantee seems a pitiful amount for 30 years use and enjoyment (and they hold their price or actually increase in price :shock: on ebay :wink: )


----------



## bugbear (24 Apr 2008)

Tony":3spgw0uh said:


> My experience (await the people who decry this) is that old saws are not as good as the manufacturers you mention and will not remain sharp fpr as long, probably have slightly bent or pitted blades which can cause them to 'grab' during the cut, and cost only £10-20 + some time sharpening them.
> I would not buy an old saw again.



There are indeed saws in the condition you mention, and I wouldn't buy them either.

On staying sharp, I have the "interesting" experience of sharpening a vintage hand saw that consumed 3 files in the process, it was tempered so hard; I suspect it will stay sharp longer than a LN; saw hardness is (was) always a compromise between ease (possibility!) of sharpeneing and edge retention.

With one collectible exception, bought for a friend, I have never paid more than 5 GBP for a good condition saw.

Of course, all this is predicated on having the skill to sharpen, which (as a reminder) the OP explicitly stated he had acquired.

Consider your points decried.

BugBear


----------



## bugbear (24 Apr 2008)

Joe":3dtbble4 said:


> bugbear":3dtbble4 said:
> 
> 
> > I've never seen a western European style hard point dovetail saw...
> ...



I think they ARE tenon saws; I've never seen a modern hard point western saw below 12", and above 12 TPI.

BugBear


----------



## Joe (24 Apr 2008)

bugbear":1jeaquon said:


> I think they ARE tenon saws; I've never seen a modern hard point western saw below 12", and above 12 TPI.
> 
> BugBear



I was equivocating because I imagine that these hardened saws are mostly sharpened for cross cutting, whilst I would have thought that rip teeth would be better in general for cutting tenons.

Joel


----------



## Benchwayze (24 Apr 2008)

bugbear":1qkrlaa4 said:


> Joe":1qkrlaa4 said:
> 
> 
> > As for hardpoint saws
> ...



I have seen those god-awful, plastic handled 'backsaws' available in hardpoint. Like the hardpoint panel saws, they save a lot of downtime on site-work. So maybe that's what the mentor was talking about. I can't comment on people I don't know, but generally a woodwork teacher should appreciate the difference between a dovetail saw and a tenon saw.

Unless you send your modern saw back to the makers for sharpening, eventually it will be just like an older saw, but hopefully with a brighter plate. But you can take your LN etc., straight out of the packaging and start using it. 

If you want a new saw, buy a good one. If you are happy with a good, old saw, then go for one from Oldtools or some-such firm. 

Cheers 
John


----------



## Anonymous (24 Apr 2008)

bugbear":3h9dg832 said:


> Tony":3h9dg832 said:
> 
> 
> > Consider your points decried.
> ...



Unfortunately, I don't consider them decried by your comments BB.

The reason is that from postings on here and conversations I have heard about, it appears to be the case that you do not actually make much (anything?) and have an interest in collecting and restoring old tools simply becasue *you like *old tools, rather than to use them in earnest.
Clearly, a person form this perspective is not going to agree that modern tools are superior to their beloved old tools. 

My interest is purely in using good quality tools to make furniture and I don't want to spend ages trying to make them work (some of my tools are old, and some new). My experience over the past 15+ years is that in general old tools are not as good as decent quality new ones such as LV, LN Clifton, Adria, Wenzloff etc. etc. and usually require considerable effort just to get them working reasonably well.

Rose tinted spectacles are fine, but progress is generally forward, improving things. Would you rather live in the technology of the 1800s or post 2000?


----------



## Benchwayze (24 Apr 2008)

Well Tony, 
I can't comment just yet. I am in the queue for a Wenzloff! 
For now, I am using an old cross-cut Gent's saw, with a few miles before it needs a sharpen. I am assuming it will be blown out of the water by the Wenzloff. I wouldn't mind sharpening my old Spear and Jackson, but my eyesight needs an overhaul. If I can find a good magnifier, I might give that a try, to keep me going until my Wenzloff is here. Then I can compare.  

(I tried the Japanese saws, but couldn't get used to the pull-cut, and short of relocating the handle I find them not much use to me. 

Although a Japanese woodworker has evolved a jig to use them as a 'hand operated sawbench'. Work that one out! 

Apparently he mounts the saw upside down in a jig and slides the cramped work back and forth across the saw. (I wonder if he got the idea from a certain saw-handle maker we know!) 

Anyhow, he is going live on this soon, so the ads will be online shortly I have no doubt.

 
Regards
John


----------



## Peter Evans (25 Apr 2008)

New vs old is a wandering discussion, because people are coming from different directions. Recently The Traditional Tools Group carried out a comparison between new - Adria, LN, Wenzloff, Gramercy dovetail saws (with old S & J and Groves saws, and a couple of Jap saws thrown in for contrast). 

The new saws were preferred by participants, with the LN slightly ahead on points, the handle was the main distinguishing factor - both "feel" and "prejudice"; only 2 testers had a modern saw (LN). The LN was the most familiar handle shape, although people were warming to the Wenzloff, I preferred the Gramercy (I have large hands, and the small handle seems to suit us). 

A little ramble of my experience: my all-time favourite dovetail saw handle is an old Taylor Bros (Aus$1) with a beyond redemption blade. The answer is obvious, get a saw kit and make a handle just like it. 

Sharpening a dovetail saw is very easy, even for the visually challenged like me. My sight has dropped quite a bit in the last 2 years and I struggle with xcut saws (have just about worked out a strategy and the last saw was ok). All rip saws are easy, dovetail the easiest (using the flip up magnifying lens on the prescription glasses). 

It only takes 1 or 2 swipes per tooth, no angles to worry about; no set - I usually do not even run a stone down the blade, the first few cuts of the saw wears off the wire edge, and the filing burr provides enough set; I am working only in dry hardwood.

Like Bugbear I buy saws cheap, typically $zero to Aus$1, max $5, although I have paid Aus$40 for a pristine sharp Atkins #51, xcut and the same for a 31/2ppi Disston #12 Rip in VG condition. I sell a lot of saws for $10-$20 each (cleaned, not sharpened), so in nett terms they probably cost me very little overall. I have sold a few interesting saws for $40+. There should be no need for anyone to need to use a pitted old saw, there are heaps out there just dirty and with surface rust that is easy to get rid of -- and you enventually have to sharpen any saw.

I find the reflection of the edge in the blade very useful, so am now taking user saws and polishing the bejesus out of them. One recent 1950's Disston 22" panel saw 10ppi was in pretty good condition (cost $0), still with the etch, teeth blunt but well shaped, probably never sharpened after someone used it to cut Gyprock (what Americans call drywall I think). 

I polished the blade to shiny, getting rid of much of the poorly made etch (this is a modern saw after all, but the 1950's metal was still good); and then I shaped the handle to suit my grip. Now I have a good panel saw to supplement my fine c1900 probably never sharpened Disston 20" 8ppi (came in box of saws and other stuff that cost $1) that is my favourite saw for xcut (getting blunt though, when I am confident of my xcut filing again I will sharpen it up - last time was around 3 years or so ago). I used the great old Disston handle as a model for the modern saw. 

After all that I decided to keep (and pay for) the Gramercy and Wenzloff saws that were lent for the demo. So now I use the S & J, Gramercy and Wenzloff saws more or less equally. I am obviously lacking discrimination. 

If I found an old Taylor Bros with a good blade, well that would be my choice.

There is a place for modern hardpoint saws, I do have one for rough work that came with a bunch of other saws. One day I was using a nice old Simonds xcut ,with good etch that I had sharpened, to cut up rough, dirty old timber, to the horror of a tool collector who was there (using a beat up old saw of some sort). Well I do have plenty of saws and they owe me little, but conceded I should not use an antique for rough work.

Currently only Wenzloff (on long back order and not cheap, but worth it) makes a quality handsaws so there is no choice but an old saw.


----------



## woodbloke (25 Apr 2008)

Tony":3fbbc0ur said:


> bugbear":3fbbc0ur said:
> 
> 
> > Tony":3fbbc0ur said:
> ...



I tend to adopt this view as well in that new *top quality* tools are superior in all respects...the problem lies in the cost (as always) 'specially for a newcomer to woodwork and cabinetmaking, which is why it's always useful to appreciate the older tools as they can be picked up and tuned for a fraction of the price of a new LN (for example)...the next hurdle then is building up sufficient knowledge and expertise to make an old tool work  - Rob


----------



## bugbear (25 Apr 2008)

Tony":3duh9f98 said:


> bugbear":3duh9f98 said:
> 
> 
> > Consider your points decried.
> ...


heh - I didn't say "refuted", I said "decried"...



tony":3duh9f98 said:


> The reason is that from postings on here and conversations I have heard about, it appears to be the case that you do not actually make much (anything?) and have an interest in collecting and restoring old tools simply because *you like *old tools, rather than to use them in earnest.
> Clearly, a person form this perspective is not going to agree that modern tools are superior to their beloved old tools.



I would agree that I am prejudiced in favour of older tools, but (I like to think) not to the point of ludicrous blindness to the merits of the new. I have some distinctly non vintage sharpening equipment, for example, not just Charnley Forest and Turkey stones.



tony":3duh9f98 said:


> My interest is purely in using good quality tools to make furniture and I don't want to spend ages trying to make them work (some of my tools are old, and some new). My experience over the past 15+ years is that in general old tools are not as good as decent quality new ones such as LV, LN Clifton, Adria, Wenzloff etc. etc. and usually require considerable effort just to get them working reasonably well.



Ah - perhaps the difference in view point is telling. You appear to be talking about the performance of old saws "as found", I'm referring to old saws restored (as far as I am able) to the best of their potential.



> Rose tinted spectacles are fine, but progress is generally forward, improving things. Would you rather live in the technology of the 1800s or post 2000?



I think progress is forward by definition; however progress does not always correlate with the passage of time; in particular I think the _average_ quality of tools took a complete nose dive during 1965-1985. It is amusing to note that much (not all) of the merit of modern "super tools" is achieved by duplicating wholesale the features from very old tools. The LN dovetail saw, for example, is a very close copy of a very old saw by Groves and Sons, dated to 1830...

If you don't have the time or inclination to restore an old tool to high performance, that's your choice. But I assure you it is possible, and I happen to find it most enjoyable.

BugBear


----------



## Anonymous (19 May 2008)

This old saw performance vs. new saw performance is funny! :lol: A lot of things affect saw performance but I have no idea how age gets to be one of them.
I have a Wenzloff dovetail saw and it cuts beautifully, not because it is new but because Mike Wenzloff is one heck of a saw sharpener. As Bugbear says, at some point it will become dull and I will sharpen it. Then it will only be as good as my sharpening skill which is the state of my other saws. The thing is, one of my sharpened saws will "outperform" any dull "supersaw" (I like that one!). 
What is "performance" anyway? Speed? Smoothness of cut? Ease of starting? What thickness and species of wood do we use to determine "performance"? It doesn't matter because next week the MaxxiSuperCutTurbo will be out and it will blow all other saws out of the water!!! :lol:


----------



## Harbo (19 May 2008)

There's an interesting article on Western Backsaws in the Spring Edition of Woodworking.

Historically, Tenon saws were 16" to 20" long , 10TPI, filed Rip and used for cutting Tenons!
The Sash saw were 14" to 16" long with 11TPI and filled Rip or crosscut.
The Carcase saw were 10" to 14" with 12 to 14" TPI, pistol grip and filed crosscut.

Nowadays, the modern Tenon saw has a similar specification of the Sash and has become a general purpose saw rather than one just for cutting tenons?

The author (Chris Schwarz) has some photos showing old timers cutting large tenon cheeks with a 26" rip saw!

Rod


----------



## bugbear (20 May 2008)

Harbo":38al167z said:


> The author (Chris Schwarz) has some photos showing old timers cutting large tenon cheeks with a 26" rip saw!
> 
> Rod



From Ellis "Modern Practical Joinery" I imagine.

BugBear


----------



## bugbear (20 May 2008)

Roger Nixon":3m984t8i said:


> What is "performance" anyway? Speed? Smoothness of cut? Ease of starting?



Indeed. My present favourite DT is an old Sorby, pistol grip.







I sharpened it with 8 degree rake AND fleam. The small amount of fleam allows me to keep track of the "to" and "from" teeth during sharpening and setting (I normally find this very difficult on small, pure rip teeth, with very little set).

The large rake (for a rip) makes starting easier. Since (IMHO) starting accuracy is a higher requirment on a DT saw than cutting speed, I think this is a good compromise. I also admit to liking the symmetry of having identical rake and fleam 

Now, I know this saw is an effective dovetail cutter.

But is it crosscut or rip? (*)

BugBear

(*) the answer is, of course, we don't have enough names for all the cutting actions we can file


----------



## Anonymous (20 May 2008)

This guy is the best saw sharpener I know. 




He, too, puts a little fleam on most of his rip saws.
Do you find the fleam reduces the blow out on the back side of the cut?


----------



## bugbear (20 May 2008)

Roger Nixon":2wgi9uhf said:


> Do you find the fleam reduces the blow out on the back side of the cut?



I haven't really done a controlled enough test to know.

In the interests of humility, I will point out that that particular DT saw was sharpened with an extreme case of cows and calves, but still cuts OK, since the teeth tips all line up (due to jointing).

BugBear


----------



## Anonymous (20 May 2008)

Back to Andrew's OP...
The best advice is to buy what you like. If you like it, you will be happy with it. There is nothing magical in the steel used for saws especially smaller backed saws. It has to be soft enough to cut with a file or the saw is disposable.
The real issue with older saws is finding what you like. A 19th century Disston D4 with its comfortable apple handle is a great tenon/carcass saw but I have found only a few good quality ones in the wild. On the other hand, you could call LN and have a replica with a curly maple handle and brass back that is sharp and ready to go and have it delivered.
I just ordered a Disston #9 halfback inspired saw from Wenzloff and I was able to specify the length, pitch, tooth geometry and handle material.
I would never hope to find something like that in the wild.


----------



## frugal (20 May 2008)

Can anyone point me to any references (online would be great, but books also good) for the differences between saws and how it actually affects the mechanics of sawing.

I keep hearing of the great differences between rip and cross cut saws, but I have no real idea what the differences are, or why they matter.

Maybe it is my techie background, but I have to know how and why things work, not just how to use them (yes I was a trial to my mother as a child).


----------



## Racers (20 May 2008)

Hi,

Have a look here its a good place to start http://www.vintagesaws.com/library/primer/sharp.html


Pete


----------



## bugbear (21 May 2008)

frugal":1b5uxtc8 said:


> Can anyone point me to any references (online would be great, but books also good) for the differences between saws and how it actually affects the mechanics of sawing.



http://www.toolemera.com/bkpdf/hollysaw1864_82BK.pdf
http://www.toolemera.com/bkpdf/hodgsonhandsaw1909bk.pdf
http://www.archive.org/details/sawshist ... 00grimrich
http://www.toolemera.com/Books%20%26%20 ... rpeni.html

(that last one overlaps the first 3 a bit)

BugBear


----------

