Veritas fine tooth dovetail saw

[woodbloke]

There was too much set even at the 12 mark, for 20 tpi.

I agree with Jacob :shock: that even though the anvil numbers don't mean anything there's still far too much set at the '12' mark (so called)
Andy has it spot on...there's a glaring hole in the market at the moment that you could drive a Routemaster through regarding the lack of a suitable set for finer toothed blades.
Where's Rob Lee when you need him? - Rob

 

[PeterBassett]

It's true enough, but I don't particularly want to pay £50 for a saw set. I think I'll bugger a few #77s off ebay for now.

 

[pedder]

It's true enough, but I don't particularly want to pay £50 for a saw set. I think I'll bugger a few #77s off ebay for now.

All that is to do, is Somax to make a new series of anvils and hammers for their already existing saw sets (eclipse 77 copies). That should not be more expensive than the existing series.

Cheers
Pedder

 

[mr grimsdale]

It's true enough, but I don't particularly want to pay £50 for a saw set. I think I'll bugger a few #77s off ebay for now.

I bought several recently - price from 99p to £2.50 + p&p.
I also bought a CK (CeKa) set, which is for bigger saws. It's a very neat design and a lot easier to use than the Eclipse, so it could be good to experiment with other unfamiliar makes and models.

 

[Harbo]

Tools for Working Wood and Dick used to sell the finer setting ones.

I also seem to remember that Mike Wenzloff posted something about tweaking commercial saw sets - but it was a long time ago?

Rod

 

[bugbear]

In the original Eclipse design, rotating the anvil simply alters the vertical position on the tooth where the bend is made to apply the set. The (of course) alters the amount of set, since the anvil is at a constant angle.

Same angle multiplied by more (or less) distance = more (or less) set.

But this also means there's only one position where the bend is made at the recommend half-way up a tooth.

If the bend is always made halfway up a tooth, and the bend angle is constant, the amount of set is a constant for a given tooth size.

For this reason, I have made a modified anvil (and matching modified hammer) where the angle is different to the standard Eclipse anvil.

Since I was aiming at small amounts of set, I also made the hammer narrower during the modification process.

However, setting 20 TPI teeth is difficult. If you want the bend to be halfway down the tooth, that's 1/40", which means that the whole process is working to rather fine tolerances.

BugBear

 

[pedder]

However, setting 20 TPI teeth is difficult. If you want the bend to be halfway down the tooth, that's 1/40", which means that the whole process is working to rather fine tolerances.

Hi Bugbear

I think it's even less than 1/40", because the with of the gullet is more than it's height. At 0° fleam the height should be1/40" so you would have to set 1/80".

That being said I do think it is OK to set the hole tooth at 20 tpi. A bad thing is to set more...

Cheers Pedder

 

[mr grimsdale]

In the original Eclipse design, rotating the anvil simply alters the vertical position on the tooth where the bend is made to apply the set. The (of course) alters the amount of set, since the anvil is at a constant angle.

Same angle multiplied by more (or less) distance = more (or less) set.

But this also means there's only one position where the bend is made at the recommend half-way up a tooth.

Not like that on my 77. In fact the anvil is rounded slightly so there is no one point of bending. Hmm, a rounded bevel!

.... setting 20 TPI teeth is difficult. If you want the bend to be halfway down the tooth, that's 1/40", which means that the whole process is working to rather fine tolerances.

BugBear

As long as the bend is well within the length of the tooth and also consistent the tolerances take care of themselves. A precise specification (e.g. bend half way up the tooth) isn't really necessary and in any case the teeth vary a lot if hand filed (the way I do it).
There is a lot of hand and eye involved - not satisfactory to those who have strict engineering tendencies!

 

[bugbear]

In the original Eclipse design, rotating the anvil simply alters the vertical position on the tooth where the bend is made to apply the set. The (of course) alters the amount of set, since the anvil is at a constant angle.

Same angle multiplied by more (or less) distance = more (or less) set.

But this also means there's only one position where the bend is made at the recommend half-way up a tooth.

Not like that on my 77. In fact the anvil is rounded slightly so there is no one point of bending.

Surely as you rotate the anvil, the bend point (the spiral arris on the anvil) moves continuously up and down the tooth?

BugBear

 

[Alf]

It's true enough, but I don't particularly want to pay £50 for a saw set. I think I'll bugger a few #77s off ebay for now.

I bought several recently - price from 99p to £2.50 + p&p.
I also bought a CK (CeKa) set, which is for bigger saws. It's a very neat design and a lot easier to use than the Eclipse, so it could be good to experiment with other unfamiliar makes and models.

I dunno, these damn c*ll*ct*rs... :lol:

A question occurs to me: finer toothed saws are not a recent invention - where are all the old saw sets to suit them? Discuss.

 

[Harbo]

I reckon it was the resulting "set" you get from filing"?
At those tpi you do not need much?

I have an old Ross & Alexander D/T with 24tpi - impossible??

Rod

 

[mr grimsdale]

....

Surely as you rotate the anvil, the bend point (the spiral arris on the anvil) moves continuously up and down the tooth?

BugBear

Yes but the teeth you are adjusting for are longer or shorter so the bend may stay at the same relative position.

.....I bought several recently - price from 99p to £2.50 + p&p.
I also bought a CK (CeKa) set, which is for bigger saws. It's a very neat design and a lot easier to use than the Eclipse, so it could be good to experiment with other unfamiliar makes and models.

I dunno, these damn c*ll*ct*rs... :lol:

A question occurs to me: finer toothed saws are not a recent invention - where are all the old saw sets to suit them? Discuss.

I'm only collecting them for experimental purposes. When I've finished I'll set them free (in pairs, for mating purposes).
Dunno abt the fine saw sets - maybe was always a hammer and anvil, then not being recognised as anything much, have all got lost.
The set from filing alone wasn't enough in my recent trials.

 

[bugbear]

....

Surely as you rotate the anvil, the bend point (the spiral arris on the anvil) moves continuously up and down the tooth?

BugBear

Yes but the teeth you are adjusting for are longer or shorter so the bend may stay at the same relative position.

"may" appears to be purest optimism! I agree that it's possible you could change the saw-set, and the next tooth just "happen" to match the change you've made, but is seems damnably unlikely.

If that's not what you meant, what did you mean?

BugBear

 

[bugbear]

A question occurs to me: finer toothed saws are not a recent invention - where are all the old saw sets to suit them? Discuss.

A special hammer, an "anvil" (actually a metal plate with a chamfer) was all that was needed.

Illustrated here (the pages about "setting")

http://toolemera.com/Manufacturers%20&% ... yzack.html

I've read elsewhere that setting this way is fast, but requires practice...

I'm fairly sure that the Pax 1776 saw is hammer set.

BugBear

 

[mr grimsdale]

....

Surely as you rotate the anvil, the bend point (the spiral arris on the anvil) moves continuously up and down the tooth?

BugBear

Yes but the teeth you are adjusting for are longer or shorter so the bend may stay at the same relative position.

"may" appears to be purest optimism! I agree that it's possible you could change the saw-set, and the next tooth just "happen" to match the change you've made, but is seems damnably unlikely.

If that's not what you meant, what did you mean?

BugBear

If the spiral bevel thingy is properly designed - the 'bending point' will be in the same position relative to the length of the tooth for every tooth. So at 4 tpi it will be at n" at 8 tpi it will be n/2" (measured from the tip).
But the anvil is rounded on mine so there is no single bending point, and in any case the steel is a bit springy so the tooth won't be bent at a neat angle, but the principle will be the same.
Or to look at it the other way - the further you turn the anvil the higher or lower the (hypothetical) bending point.

 

[Alf]

I've read elsewhere that setting this way is fast, but requires practice...

Ah, well that's the thing I'm wondering. There are fast ways to set any saw - with practice. But the plier type saw set was introduced to make it easier without practice. So why not for the finer teeth?

To be honest I'm with Rod - the "set" you get from the filing job has always seemed sufficient. If it's not, it's usually turned out that I should have been using a coarser saw for the job anyway. On the other hand I know I'm not as studious about my sharpening as I could be.

 

[mahking51]

Got one of these weird sets by Atkins

seems very well made indeed
Cheers,
Martin

 

[woodbloke]

Having been to Rycotewood and spoken at length to Robert Ingham, I'm coming to the conclusion that these finer d/t saws aren't worth the effort, he certainly doesn't use one for the stuff that he makes. Instead he uses a 100mm Zona razor saw for wood up to 6mm thick, a slightly coarser one for wood up about 10mm and a his standard R&L d/t saw for anything over 12mm, which is really carcass construction. They cut on the pull stroke but are not Jap tooth format and they simply get binned when blunt, which apparently takes a long time as they can be used to cut metal as well.
I intend to get hold of a few shortly and will only now use my LN d/t saw for bigger stuff - Rob

 

[mr grimsdale]

Having been to Rycotewood and spoken at length to Robert Ingham, I'm coming to the conclusion that these finer d/t saws aren't worth the effort, he certainly doesn't use one for the stuff that he makes. Instead he uses a 100mm Zona razor saw for wood up to 6mm thick, a slightly coarser one for wood up about 10mm and a his standard R&L d/t saw for anything over 12mm, which is really carcass construction. ...

His stuff is more akin to precision model making than woodwork so a Zona saw would suit. It's orses fer courses - I've tried various and for me the standard 8" 20 tpi seems best option; DTs in hardwoods from 6mm to 12mm done with speed in mind - slightly less than absolutely perfect, it's always a compromise.

 

[woodbloke]

His stuff is more akin to precision model making than woodwork so a Zona saw would suit. It's orses fer courses - I've tried various and for me the standard 8" 20 tpi seems best option; DTs in hardwoods from 6mm to 12mm done with speed in mind - slightly less than absolutely perfect, it's always a compromise.

Again, depends how you like to work, real precision in my view requires a finer saw. He does do a lot of smaller stuff but his bigger pieces are built to the same standard and could in no way be described 'models', but would concede that his designs are very much an acquired taste - Rob