Spear & Jackson's "Spearior 52"?

[Jacob]

Hello,

A mirror only has one reflective side, whereas a bright saw plate has two. It is important when 'experimenting' to replicate the conditions or the result will be spurious.

Reflection on two sides means it is impossible not to have the saw square and vertical, there is only one outcome which can satisfy the conditions.

Mike.

How do you move your head to see both sides whilst still sawing in a straight line without wobbling? Eyes on stalks? At least I experimented, but you clearly haven't!

PS and to watch the cut itself you would need a third eye, not moving, whilst you wave the other two around on their stalks.

 

[G S Haydon]

Depends on the size of the saw Jacob and how the work is clamped. On my small dovetail saw I can see all around with small movements and you can see reflection just by tilting your head slightly, not that I'm using the reflection. http://pinterest.com/pin/519532506983888175/ I don't think the the idea is to lower yourself to observe or move in an overly crazy way.
Also, using a mirror is not an accurate way to test a theory.
I never learnt with a saw shiny enough for it to become part of what I do, however for those who have a shiny saw plate perhaps it does help.

 

[AndyT]

While we are all lurching along off topic, I'll just add that I thought the real point of occasionally using the reflection on a saw as an aid is not for 90 degree cuts - they are pretty much automatic after a bit of experience - but for 45 degree cuts. It's much easier to judge an angled cut plus its reflection and see if they make 90 degrees than it is to eyeball a 45 degree line on its own. (This is similar to the way you can mitre cut the ends of banding or stringing by looking at its reflection on the flat side of the chisel.)

 

[woodbrains]

How do you move your head to see both sides whilst still sawing in a straight line without wobbling? Eyes on stalks? At least I experimented, but you clearly haven't!

PS and to watch the cut itself you would need a third eye, not moving, whilst you wave the other two around on their stalks.

I have binocular vision.

Mike.

 

[Jacob]

Here's a trad way of polishing an old rusty saw i.e by using it

Not totally surprising but this does bring up a shine, albeit remaining dark verging on black, and there is very little friction after a bit of use, with no intervention from a mad old charlady with sheets of abrasive and tins of Brasso

But what did surprise me is that even in this condition you can get a reflection

But I still don't think it's of any use!

Here's another old rip saw being polished - chap next door brought round this 18" mahogany board and wanted it splitting. Started it off over the TS so just had to saw out the middle 12"

I have to say I have an aversion to shining up these old tools with SiC paper - so destructive and so pointless. Vandalism!
It's the toolie equivalent of caustic soda dipping joinery - gets rid of the paint/varnish but irredeemably spoils the object.

 

[G S Haydon]

Jacob

That's a real beauty! I took the time to read some of your older posts yesterday evening (I know, I need to get out more) and one thing struck me. Would I be right in assuming you would call yourself a "Joiner" and a good one from what I can see. That's not a put down, I am and I love it! I think nearly every post you put out there is spot on from a joiners perspective.
The spoke shave post example was a good one, your Chinese brand shave was working well on your redwood stair string (I guess that's what it is).
Would you ever concede that if the work was much finer a better quality tool could be called for? For instance if instead of a stair string you were making one of these http://www.finefurnituremaker.com/bespo ... niture.htm leaving aside if you like the design or if you would like to make it.
I often feel concerned that your are so full on with your opinions that a really good message get's lost. I think your message is reflective of the woodworker you are and you equip yourself appropriately for your work. If you are a shuttering carpenter it's unlikely you would want a paring chisel and an infill plane and if you were a pattern maker a lump hammer and a hardpoint saw might not be quite the ticket.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way but I often feel a good point is often lost by trying to push a certain type of tool, in that respect you seem no different than the "gurus" and the "novelty plane makers" you hate. That's just the vibe i got from the old posts.
Your chisel preparation is perfectly fine for a joiner but would you expect a pattern maker to do the same?
Please feel free to throw this back in my face as I can appreciate it's not really any business of mine. I just worry that a skilled joiners valued opinion can sometimes be lost in the haze of combat.

 

[Jacob]

.That's a real beauty!

Two actually. One panel saw and one rip saw. £13 the pair on ebay!

....
Would you ever concede that if the work was much finer a better quality tool could be called for? For instance if instead of a stair string you were making one of these http://www.finefurnituremaker.com/bespo ... niture.htm ......

Not too fond of sci-fi gothic but yes a good deal of skill is required without a doubt - not least the which/what/how with the tools.
I think there is a big divide here:
On the one hand the toolies would burble on about expensive spokeshaves, scraper planes, steel, bevels, exotic grains etc etc. On the other hand a practical person faced with the challenge of making one of these might just cut the cackle and go straight for sanding disc on a drill, surform rasp etc with the most sophisticated tool being perhaps a card scraper. All to be finished with ROS or by hand with sand paper and cork blocks.
From what I recall of David Savage's tool comments in the past (not accessible now unless you pay for them) he was on the side of the practical maker and not a toolie at all. I might be wrong - there's money in tools and no profit in telling someone not to buy something!

 

[MIGNAL]

That chair has a severe case of Rickets. Needs more Calcium not A2 or PMV-11.

 

[G S Haydon]

Thanks Jacob,

I'm glad there has been no offense taken. Mr savages tool advice is still free to view online http://www.finefurnituremaker.com/woodworking_tools.htm and he seems to prefer highly tuned tools, flat chisels etc. He also seems to pull no punches while reviewing the stanley sweetheart plane http://www.finefurnituremaker.com/news/ ... l-article/
His review is an example. I would first look at the type of woodworker he is and what he makes before taking the advice on a purchase. And BTW I have come to really dislike the term "Woodworker" it is so generic. I am a Joiner. My advice should or views should be taken as such.

 

[woodbrains]

Hello.

David Savage's wobbly furniture leaves me cold; I suppose that is a taste thing. But that said, although surforms will shape timber and bobbin sanders ROS etc, they do not allow you to see or feel what is going on. There is a certain sensitivity that is important when doing this sort of work. The grain graphic for instance is worked with, not ignored. Wood is not a nondescript material like plastic. So a well tuned spoke shave is as efficient at wood removal as a rasp and allows you to see what you are doing, not rough things up and obscure the view. Also, sanders are dusty and noisy and inefficient at wood removal. Tuned planes and shaves do things quicker, quieter and allow you to be a more sensitive craftsman.

I actually like the expression 'woodworker' as other things can just be pompous. There is greatness in good joinery as pattern making and fine furniture. And to some extent, we all cross over from one to another from time to time. A prime tool, well set up for furniture making will work for any task to which it is set, but not necessarily the other way round. So if asked how to do something to get a plane working, the default mode is to set it up for the best possible circumstance. Especially since it is easy. Often it is easier to do things properly than to try to employ various dodges and cheats. A minute might be saved by not sharpening to that next finest grit, but you might spend an extra 10 with sandpaper correcting the poorer finish. Expedients will be learned by the user later as fits. Sam Maloof always referred to himself , simply as 'woodworker'.

Mike.

 

[G S Haydon]

Mike,

I'm with you on the furniture. I marvel at it's technical nature and have the greatest respect for the skills and flair involved but it's not for me. Perhaps the term "Woodworker" is more of an issue on this forum and more accurately the hand tool forum. The wide range of perspectives from different branches of woodworking could, I feel at times make it a confusing place.

I would also agree with you to a point on tool set up and this is where those branches cause conflict. Put simply it has not been necessary for me to flatten a chisel or tune up a plane as a bench joiner. This has not been to the detriment of my joinery work. It might smack of ignorance but flattening chisels or a hand plane tune up have never been on my radar. With tools in and out of the workshop in and out of a tool box preserving them in any kind of highly tuned fashion would be hard going.
That said I can appreciate a highly tuned tool is required for fine accurate work, that's why I took the time to tune up my Record #4 which will be safely stored in my tool chest for my private, personal projects.
It's all about context that's why here at least the label of "woodworker" can be confusing.

 

[Jacob]

...... I suppose that is a taste thing. But that said, although surforms will shape timber and bobbin sanders ROS etc, they do not allow you to see or feel what is going on. There is a certain sensitivity that is important when doing this sort of work. The grain graphic for instance is worked with, not ignored. Wood is not a nondescript material like plastic. So a well tuned spoke shave is as efficient at wood removal as a rasp and allows you to see what you are doing, not rough things up and obscure the view. Also, sanders are dusty and noisy and inefficient at wood removal. Tuned planes and shaves do things quicker, quieter and allow you to be a more sensitive craftsman.

Interesting that whole paragraph. 100% baloney really, but there's a lot of it about - this semi mystical "sensitive craftsman" thing. Good example of what I meant by the big divide, see above.
I like "The grain graphic for instance is worked with, not ignored" :lol: :lol: I think I might take to saying that at parties, when people ask me what I do.

PS Also, "sanders are dusty and noisy and inefficient at wood removal" is true in part, but they are actually very efficient at removing wood. You should try one Mikey!

PPS "Sam Maloof always referred to himself , simply as 'woodworker'." etc.
PPPS I take it back what I said about Maloof.I just read a bio he's obviously been around a bit! I'm not too fond of his spiky chairs though.

 

[G S Haydon]

He's back!

#-o Why does it have to be like this ](*,)

 

[dm65]

He's back!

#-o Why does it have to be like this ](*,)

Cos he like's pulling your timber

Ask him when a blade\chisel is sharp enough - I double dare you

 

[G S Haydon]

Den, good point, well made. No need to take the bait

 

[Jacob]

The whole point of "sculptural" shapes like Savages is that they aren't constrained by tools and techniques. Things like that would be very difficult to produce if there was an arbitrary commitment to a romantic view of woodwork. They are what you can get when you step away from the straight and narrow. Though I can't speak for Savage and have no idea of his "philosophy" if he has one at all. I guess he's mainly just earning a living and has found a way to get money from very rich people! Good thing too! He doesn't seem to be banging any particular drum.
Generally, actual sculptors will lay their hands on anything which will produce the end result, though there are those with a semi mystical approach (e.g. Eric Gill) who commit themselves to materials and techniques in a romantic way, usually harping back to an idealised and illusory golden age and sometimes dressing in funny clothes!
It takes all sorts (which is the answer to "why does it have to be like this?") and the slightly self-righteous moralistic tone of the romantics doesn't appeal to all of us.
Krenov springs to mind - he used to talk the talk but at the same time bodged things together with router etc in a very non-purist way. He's responsible for a lot of it!

 

[bugbear]

Couple of classic high quality saws - nice!

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

....
Couple of classic high quality saws - nice!

BugBear

Ebay lucky dip!
24" Robt Sorby 8 pt
28" Ibbertson 4 pt rip. I guess it's Ibbertson but can only see ..bertson.
Different owners marks on each but seem like a pair and neither much used.
PS just had a look - only one name "W Wilkie" and initials WSW so I think they were both his. From Scotland as I recall. Presumably bought not long before he had no further use for them - popped his clogs?

 

[woodbrains]

Krenov springs to mind - he used to talk the talk but at the same time bodged things together with router etc in a very non-purist way. He's responsible for a lot of it!

Hello,

I'll take the bait one more time, and I do realise it is bait, as Jacob knows I have visited krenov's home, workshop and college. But for the sake of those who might be reading this and the outside chance they give any credence to Jacob's mis informed gibberish, I'll set the record straight. Krenov had very little to do with routers, it being well documented that his early trials with them left him dissatisfied. In fact he mostly used a small cast iron spindle, converted to take router cutters, long before router tables became common place. He mostly shaped wood with planes, spoke shaves and knives almost all of which he made himself as the job dictated. His 'thing' was to leave the very refined marks from the tool behind. He referred to this as the craftsman leaving fingerprints, and did his utmost to make the tool cut cleanly, to the final finish, as sand papering would remove the marks they the craftsman had left. Edge tools, not routers.

And bodging is another field of woodworking that is extremely skilled. Wrongly Used as an insult for poor craftsmen, again shows lack of understanding and ignorance; as is ridiculing late and highly regarded craftsmen, like Gill, Maloof and Krenov, not around to defend themselves. You truly are a Philistine, and owning a few old saws does not change that. Using them to cut up rotten old pallets only illustrates the fact.

Mike.

 

[Jacob]

......You truly are a Philistine, and owning a few old saws does not change that. Using them to cut up rotten old pallets only illustrates the fact.

Mike.

I was only reducing it so I could get it to the bandsaw, honest sir!
What on earth is wrong with sawing up a bit of wood with a wood saw? That's what it's for isn't it? Or should I hang it on the wall and worship it?
Incidentally whilst we are on the subject - a scrub plane is ideal for ripping the surface off pallet wood, really fast and effective. I'm quite interested in using scrap low-grade wood for making nice things and have some projects in mind, but not until I have my new workshop.

NB I wasn't ridiculing Gill, I'm an admirer. Much of his work was done with stone quarried only a few yards from where I live.
I was ridiculing his semi religious craft theories. I don't think they did him any good, he couldn't shake off his middle class up-tight englishness. He should have gone to Paris as he was invited (by Maillol, apprentice to Rodin) , but too timid to make the break. Semi religious craft theories seem to be very much an english thing - tool worshippers and fetishists crying blasphemy, everywhere!

Here is a bit of our local stone, currently to be seen hanging around in the V&A: