Any saw makers out there?

[Ttrees]

I have found that handsaw blades are too thick for backsaws.

peronally I would not hesitate to shift the worn out blade on a saw I have come to like. If my favourite handsaw reaches that point in life there will be no original material left in it.

Have you tried measuring some cheap throwaway tenon saws, I've got a Draper one which is thin, must check the Stanley one I have someday and compare.
Bought a micrometer in liddles for a tenner for the job of this and properly being able to measure set, seems good quality.
Eager to get me some more saw files at some stage.

 

[mark w]

You could try Skelton Saws.

 

[luke burgess]

Thanks for all your help folks!
The one in the middle is what's left of the 16 inch plate i'm trying to find the replacement for.

 

[Jameshow]

These are what I have any use....?

 

[Ttrees]

Thanks for all your help folks!
The one in the middle is what's left of the 16 inch plate i'm trying to find the replacement for.

How much plate was originally there on that pistol grip saw?

 

[spanner48]

Try Dieter Schmidt in Germany:

https://www.fine-tools.com/make-your-own-saw.html
They do plates for backsaws for €27 to €31. Thickness 0.38 to 0.51mm [28 down to 25 gauge] 1095 Spring steel, hardened and tempered to Rc48-51

 

[IWW]

......The one in the middle is what's left of the 16 inch plate i'm trying to find the replacement for.

Luke, I thought you said the saw in question was 14 inches? Unless your ruler has been shrunk, it looks to be more like 10 inches (~250mm) or is the skewed pic really throwing me off?

Judging by the position & cant of the handle, I would reckon the saw isn't all that much reduced from original, but that's just my guess, I could be way off. The pitting certainly isn't pretty, but I would think it is still usable, I was imagining something far worse from your original description (I've seen a LOT worse!). However, it probably looks worse in the hand than a picture & I'm certainly not fond of pitted blades myself, so I can see why you might want to replace it for a "user" rather than keep it original as a memento...

Cheers,
Ian

 

[kwigly]

Matt, on Backsaw.net, today , has some plate available

 

[luke burgess]

These are what I have any use....? View attachment 133396

Thanks James.
Sorry for the late response!
The bit I'm after is 405mm x 125mm
Im not sure you would get anything that big out of what's there
but thanks again for the kind offer..
Luke.

 

[luke burgess]

Luke, I thought you said the saw in question was 14 inches? Unless your ruler has been shrunk, it looks to be more like 10 inches (~250mm) or is the skewed pic really throwing me off?

Judging by the position & cant of the handle, I would reckon the saw isn't all that much reduced from original, but that's just my guess, I could be way off. The pitting certainly isn't pretty, but I would think it is still usable, I was imagining something far worse from your original description (I've seen a LOT worse!). However, it probably looks worse in the hand than a picture & I'm certainly not fond of pitted blades myself, so I can see why you might want to replace it for a "user" rather than keep it original as a memento...

Cheers,
Ian

Ian and All.
The 4 saws i started out with were 2 @ 14", 1 @ 9" and 1 @ 16"
The 9"i had to make a new handle, about 1/3 was missing.
One of the 14"saws was rotten at the toe and heel (so bad i could put my finger through it)
So that was cut down to just shy of 12"and a new handle made.
The second 14"plate was even worse so was binned.
The 16"was also shot at the toe and heel so the plate was removed, rot cut of and fitted to the 14"
So i'm left with a 16"brass back ,handle and nuts, but no plate,
the rusty one that came of was huge(4 1/2" depth of cut)
All plates have had old teeth filed of and new teeth cut.
Never expected to get 1 saw let alone 3 users out of them but having done so it feels
like i ought to complete the task.!
I think they were in such bad shape from hanging in a leaky shed for decades, moisture collecting round the handles and dripping if the toes.
I fully appreciate this is the undertaking of a mad man but ill take the saws for the 9 hours i;ve got in it.
And my tooth fettling ability is much improved.

 

[IWW]

I don't think you're mad a'tall Luke - I'm all for resurrecting old tools where possible - the spine & bolts for a backsaw are the most difficult parts to make or obtain if you don't have the gear, so well worth preserving for a second life . I wasn't casting any aspersions, just got confused because the saws you showed were the cut-down versions, & you started out talking about much larger blades, that's all.

And to reiterate, I would strongly recommend you use at least 0.030" (~.75mm) plate for a 14 or 16" saw; I think for general use you'd find 0.5mm way too flimsy & flexible on a large saw like that. There are no absolutes when it comes to sawplate thickness, but based on measurements of old saws & my own experience, I've developed a few "rules of thumb" for saw gauges. Twenty thou, or 0.5mm plate is fine for small saws up to around 250mm, but it would be very risky to use it on a whopper. Youll have fun & games getting a large thin plate flat & straight on assembly (if you buy it by the roll, it'll almost certainly have a slight residual curve which takes a bit of skill to remove completely). Also, such a thin gauge would be likely to kink on you at the least catch in a large saw.

A 600mm hardpoint might have a big enough blade to yield the size you need & they are about 0.30" thick (at least the few I've re-purposed were), and not tapered (which a good quality old-style handsaw would be). If you can find an old used-up hardpoint saw large enough, that would be the best option imo, but even buying a new saw & cutting it up would be a relatively inexpensive source for material for a one-off. Buying a roll of plate & sharing it should work out cheaper per blade, but not that much, & it's a lot more bother if you are only going to make one or two blades. Since the vast majority of sawplate would be made for hardpoint manufacturers, nowadays it's highly likely you'll get the same material anyway....

Cheers,
Ian

 

[--Tom--]

Are there any good tutorials on straightening a brass backed saw. I have one that’s got a distinct curve to the blade

 

[IWW]

Are there any good tutorials on straightening a brass backed saw. I have one that’s got a distinct curve to the blade

I've seen various articles, but for the life of me could not remember where. The first step is to try & identify the source of the problem. The most obvious fault is a bent spine (moderately common) which is usually easy enough to straighten but proceed carefully, the last thing you want is to make it worse!

If there is no distinct bend in the back, just a curved tooth line, the cause is most likely the spine having been knocked out of whack. This is due to the way the back grips the blade. It's not perfectly even all the way along, you get slightly tighter & looser spots. When the back is tapped on the saw originally, the assembler taps it into position carefully so the blade remains straight, but if the spine gets a good bump, it can cause the blade to assume a curve. If you sight along the spine it will look straight enough but the blade assumes a curve, most pronounced along the tooth line. So the first action usually advised is to tap the spine up & down a bit to see what effect that has - often enough you'll find a point where the blade straightens.

I've seen a case where the spine was kinked at one spot where something heavy had been dropped on it, which put undue pressure on the blade at that point & caused a curve. That isn't very common in my experience, and it would be pretty obvious if that's what you have.

Another source of curved blades is a slightly-off slot in the handle. This is in fact very common, I'd say 1 in 5 or 6 old saws I've seen has this effect. It's usually very slight & involves only the last inch or so of blade below the handle cheeks. It's quite difficult to correct, & not worth the bother in most cases, the bit of the saw affected almost never gets used.

It's not very common in my experience, but occasionally the blade itself is found to be buckled when you remove the back. In that case you will need to hammer it flat. Small curves are fairly easy to deal with - use a good flat anvil & a hammer with a slightly convex face. Go gently, lots of light blows evenly distributed over the convex side of the curve is the go - don't whale the daylights out of it or you'll leave dents. The idea is to create enough tension on the convex side to counter the tension that is making it concave on the opposite side. My saw-hammering skills are very rudimentary, but I have successfully straighted a few saws that were moderately buckled - not too sure how I'd go on a really bent one though, I think there is a point where replacement would be the better option....
Cheers,
Ian

 

[--Tom--]

Thanks @IWW for that detailed reply, I shall give it a go today and see how I get on.

When you say tap the spine up and down, trying to work out which way is up- Hitting the spine down towards the teeth, or towards the handle, or tapping the sides?

 

[deema]

To straighten an S in backed saw is really easy. It usually occurs when the toe end of the blade had been knocked down into the back until it hits solid usually due to say being dropped. I go though the whole process on my thread about restoring a 99p back saw on here. Anyway in summary remove the blade from the back, reinsert it and tap at the toe and heel to seat it…..not too far in. You DO NOT tap it anywhere other than at the ends when the blade is in the slot. Tapping at the ends creates tension in the blade that makes it straight. The old timers would when it occurred turn the saw over and tap the toe on the bench to retension it until they had exhausted the adjustment and then take out the blade as I have described. Often the toe of the blade plate appears narrower than at the heel, thus shows it’s been knocked in a long way! They look awful and used to sell for buttons on auction sites. A quick blade removal and proper adjustment made them look brilliant.

 

[deema]

Found the thread. In one of the revamps of the site the piccies gave list position in the posts, but I think it’s still easy to follow.
https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/thread...ng-of-a-99p-saw-completed.98494/#post-1068749

 

[IWW]

......When you say tap the spine up and down, trying to work out which way is up- Hitting the spine down towards the teeth, or towards the handle, or tapping the sides?

By "up" I mean away from the tooth line - as deema said, it's often knocked down so the blade is deeper in the spine at the front. This is so common on old saws you may think it's meant to be that way, but I think it's just the result of knocks & bumps. Tapping or re-fitting the spine will frequently cure a curved blade, but certainly not always. Saws get mistreated in their long lives & blades & spines do get buckled & bent - tapping the back won't fix this.

There have been discussions amongst the saw-making/restoring fraternity about how far a back should be tapped down, but little consensus. It obviously depends on the depth of the slot, for starters. Folded backs have a "full" slot, and new or newish saws with folded backs that I've handled typically have the blade 2/3rds to 3/4 of the way in. Slotted backs (i.e. those made by cutting a slot in a solid bar) vary according to who made them - some makers cut quite shallow slots and glue the blade in with a metal glue like "Loctite", or in the case of one boutique maker, he rivets them in. Traditionalists frown on such measures because they say it robs them of the "adjustment" potential, but the adherents of "fixed" spines say you won't need to adjust anything because the blade can't get out of whack. Choose your own side...

Claims are also made that folded backs are superior to those made by slotting a solid bar. I've yet to see any convincing arguments let alone empirical data that would back up this claim. In my view, a well-folded back & a well-made slotted back should work identically. As long as the blade is gripped fairly evenly or at least in the 'right' places it should do what it's supposed to do. A bit tighter over the first couple of inches & the last couple can work well (see below).

Now, about this "tensioning" business. I fail to see how tapping the back vertically onto the blade introduces any useful tension in the blade. I follow the example of an American maker when assembling a saw. I apply the back so it is sitting about 10mm forward of where it should be, & tap it down as far as required. Then I carefully tap the spine back until it snugs up to the back of the recess in the handle. This is where the tighter grip at back & front serve a purpose, it will introduce some tension along the blade, though not much, & it is all along the top of the blade but this may assist in holding it straight.

I've been experimenting with this "tensioning" method for a couple of years; it took a bit of fiddling to get it right on the first couple I tried, but I think I have it reasonably sorted now. Does it make a noticeable difference to the action of the saw? At first I thought so, but have decided it's as much wishful thinking as a real effect; it's certainly not a night & day thing.

There are several factors that influence how a user perceives a given saw, such as grip or "hang" angle, which affects effort & control. Size, weight & length of blade are also major factors. These are all somewhat arbitrary & subject to personal preference, but what makes the biggest difference of all & universally appreciated, is having well sharpened & set teeth of an appropriate pitch for the job in hand....

cheers,

 

[--Tom--]

Thanks James.
Sorry for the late response!
The bit I'm after is 405mm x 125mm
Im not sure you would get anything that big out of what's there
but thanks again for the kind offer..
Luke.

This looks like it would do the job fairly reasonably

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/313458529767?hash=item48fb9595e7:g:YwUAAOSw4wZdutxi

 

[luke burgess]

This looks like it would do the job fairly reasonably

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/313458529767?hash=item48fb9595e7:g:YwUAAOSw4wZdutxi

Thanks Tom.
The chap selling this has another piece bang on size and thickness!
Is CS95 a bit on the hard side?
I was advised to use CS80.
I'm happy to have a go filling the harder stuff but would be gutted if the teeth start snapping while setting them..

 

[--Tom--]

Thanks Tom.
The chap selling this has another piece bang on size and thickness!
Is CS95 a bit on the hard side?
I was advised to use CS80.
I'm happy to have a go filling the harder stuff but would be gutted if the teeth start snapping while setting them..

Cs95 is equivalent to 1095, so should be fine, the smudge extra carbon wouldn’t cause me much concern. Seems like it’s 48-51 HRC which should be fine to file.