Child-sized handsaw

[Mike G]

I received a saw a number of years ago as part of a bundle of tools, and I mentioned it on here because it was so small. I put it on one side for future restoration, and that day arrived yesterday. I was looking for a saw with a coarser cut than my normal 10 TPI saws, but not as harsh as my rip saw which has 4 TPI, and this one is the only one I could find. It advertised itself as 6TPI:



However, if you count, it's actually 8 TPI. That must mean it has been refiled at some stage, or that it was mis-stamped originally. Or, it actually says 9 and I can't count. That photo, by the way, is after I had sharpened it. I've never seen such appalling teeth as this had before I filed them. I wonder whether it had been used for cutting masonry.

These photos were all taken in one batch after I had spent some time working on restoring this saw to working condition, so I'm afraid there isn't one of the "before" state. BUt just to give you an idea, this is the handle, and it was like this when I got it:



Someone had obviously tried and failed to take this apart previously.......and I can see why. The saw nuts wouldn't unscrew! They would turn, but not come apart. In the end I levered them off with screwdriver and pincers, and then could see why they didn't unscrew:





There's no thread. These are press-fitted, more like a fancy rivet. Has anyone here seen that before?

The handle was an awful thing in beech, in really poor condition (split along the line of the saw plate, and vandalised as you've seen), but worst of all, tiny:



That's it on top of a normal saw. Along with the really short plate....:



......(18" if you can't make it out in the photo), it's clearly built for a child. It has the stamp of a Skulnick and Son in Liverpool:





They had a business in London Rd Liverpool between 1926 and 1955, so aging the saw isn't difficult.

Anyway, the handle isn't salvageable, so I have made one from bog oak, opened out slightly between the "wings" (top and bottom) of the original so that I can use it with my bigger-than-average hands. I can't see it getting an awful lot of use as it is so small, but now and then, when 8TPI is necessary, it will get a run-out.

 

[Steve Maskery]

Doesn't the figure 9 refer to PPI (Points Per Inch) rather than TPI?
S

 

[Sheffield Tony]

Is it 9 PPI - a dim way of counting teeth popular in the US ?

I had a shrunken saw described as a "toolbox saw", as it can be carried in a toolbox it could more likely have been abused by tradesmen.

 

[AndyT]

At first, I thought this was probably a saw from a "Carpentry Set" made for a boy to use. That would fit with the cheap rivets and small handle. But against this theory, we have it nicely marked on the blade as being sold by a proper Ironmongers. Maybe it was from a set for household repairs.

But the thing that says this was owned by a professional is that he stamped his name - A. E. SMITH - on the handle. A boy or amateur would not have spent money on a name stamp or paid money into a local insurance scheme against their loss or theft.

If you look back into old catalogues, the range of lengths available used to be much greater than it is now. For example, here's a page from the 1928 Marples catalogue:



You can see that saws were available in a range of qualities from 10" up to 30" long.
Even if you look at the cheapest range on that page (the "Shamrock" range, second from last) there were 10 sizes, from 10" to 28" long.

You could argue that the Marples catalogue was a specialist one, showing a huge range of tools, some of them extremely specialised. (What price a "Roller coverer's chisel"?). Here's a page from a catalogue issued by the big Birmingham firm, Parker Winder & Achurch. You may know them as architectural ironmongers, but in their prime they sold everything from a gaslight chandelier to a winch to lift the top off your horse-drawn carriage. Naturally, they included a range of tradesmen's tools, and this is their entire entry for saws. No messing about with subtle differences in quality, but the full range of lengths was still on offer. (I think this catalogue is somewhere around 1905 to 1910.)



Looking at something a bit later, a catalogue from Gardiner & Sons of Bristol from 1940, the range of lengths has been much reduced - the shortest and longest options have gone, so most of the options are in the range 20" to 28". But there is one exception - the cheapest range, "for farm or house use" could still be had in 16" or 18" size.



Maybe Mr Smith was a professional, but not a carpenter or joiner? A plumber or electrician would have needed a saw for dealing with floorboards etc and could have favoured a cheap model that fitted in his ordinary toolbag. Or maybe a cheap model was the only one the shop had in the short size.

Whatever the story behind it, I'm pleased to see that your interest in old tools is continuing to expand, beyond the few essentials and onto some of the less usual finds!

 

[Mike G]

It's the tiny handle which led me to think it must be for a child. It really isn't usable by an adult.

 

[Mike G]

Doesn't the figure 9 refer to PPI (Points Per Inch) rather than TPI?

Is it 9 PPI - a dim way of counting teeth popular in the US ?.....

Well it was made in Sheffield and sold in Liverpool so wasn't made for export. Perhaps that American habit had started being used here, but I suspect that it is more likely a simple error.

 

[AndyT]

It's the tiny handle which led me to think it must be for a child. It really isn't usable by an adult.

It used to be normal for smaller sized tools to have proportionately smaller handles, at least it did for things like chisels and hammers. As the size of the saw plate reduced, there would have been less room for a big handle. Presumably you couldn't use some sort of three finger grip instead of the usual one?

To be clear, I think you've done the right thing making a handle that suits you and I'm sure it will be much better quality than the saw!

 

[Mike G]

I looked hard at keeping the original, but it was so destroyed that I couldn't see any way it could work. I also quickly realised that a proper sized handle would foul the work, so it had to be small. I'll show a photo later, but what I've essentially done is copy the handle exactly, but turn the lower horn-thingy (what's that protuberance called?) out a little so that the palm of my hand can fit against the handle.

 

[AndyT]

Sounds good.

As for the terminology of the parts of a handle, I couldn't do any better than defer to Simon Barley. This is from his impressive essential work, British Saws & Saw Makers from c1660.



He also notes that really small saws, ie those below about 10", generally had open handles - that might have been a way round your problem.

 

[AJB Temple]

Nice.

Get the bench finished! You are letting us down with this interminable delay.

(I am jealous. I am stuck here with nothing to do as I only have electrical tools with me and have done all those jobs).

 

[Mike G]

....As for the terminology of the parts of a handle, I couldn't do any better than defer to Simon Barley. This is from his impressive essential work, British Saws & Saw Makers from c1660.

.....

Thanks. That's handy. I was somehow right with the horns.

.....Get the bench finished! You are letting us down with this interminable delay.....

I've demolishing the old one at the moment, and will pick up some beech tomorrow. Relax!

 

[Cabinetman]

Never come across PPI what’s the difference between a point and a tooth? Suppose I’m asking if a point isn’t a tooth what is it?
To my eyesight that saw of yours looked to be almost 10tpi Mike.
Ian

 

[9fingers]

I'm sure I recall TPI Vs PPI on saws but as you all know I'm not exactly a hand tool expert :lol:

PPI = TPI +1

PPI is not really a sensible or logical measure as it count the first and last point over a 1 inch span

Bob

 

[Mike G]

Here's the original handle:



Note how the lower horn is digging into my hand. And here is the new one (above):



The difference is subtle, but significant:

 

[AndyP]

Looks like 9tpi to me



If the saw is hung up by the handle, mine are, the 9 would be the right way up.

 

[AndyT]

That looks the business!

This link may be useful if you haven't already found some suitable saw screws:

https://www.flinn-garlick-saws.co.uk/pr ... cessories/

 

[Mike G]

That's where I got my little stash from. But thanks.

 

[Jonathan]

The guy that taught me had a saw, must have been about 15" to 18" long,
He starpened his saw's most nights after work and over the many years they just got smaller and smaller.

Sent from my Redmi Note 9S using Tapatalk

 

[Mike G]

Looks like 9tpi to me.....

Hmm......



17 tp2i, perhaps?

 

[Dr.Al]

Looks like 9tpi to me.....

Hmm......



17 tp2i, perhaps?

:lol:

The very last tooth (on the right of the image) looks to be a different geometry to the others. If it were the same shape as the others, I think you'd be counting nine in that second inch. Rough image editing ensues...

 

[Mike G]

Well, I finally got this finished:



I had a lot of trouble with the finish on the handle due to using linseed oil in my 1:1:1 mix, and it then not setting. I assume this is temperature related. Anyway, this is a working tool, not a show-piece, so it's good enough.

It really is an odd little thing, but it works perfectly well.

 

[Cabinetman]

Looks good Mike, you will be appalled to hear that I don’t sharpen and no longer possess that type of saw, I just buy Spear and Jackson hardpoints BUT I am well known for cutting almost any cuts required any length or thickness, when my son Ben and I did my uk workshop we didn’t have any electricity and the building was pretty much derelict, wish I could remember how many sheets of ply and OSB we used, all cut by hand. But it was lots and lots.

 

[Mike G]

Looks good Mike, you will be appalled to hear that I don’t sharpen and no longer possess that type of saw, I just buy Spear and Jackson hardpoints BUT I am well known for cutting almost any cuts required any length or thickness, when my son Ben and I did my uk workshop we didn’t have any electricity and the building was pretty much derelict, wish I could remember how many sheets of ply and OSB we used, all cut by hand. But it was lots and lots.

I'm not appalled, Ian. It's only in the last few years that I've stopped doing what you do. Ultimately, it was the nasty handles that drove me away from Hardpoints. I had one or two where the two halves of plastic didn't meet properly, causing me discomfort and blisters. When I picked up an old saw I was struck by how wonderfully comfortable the handles were, and decided that in the workshop I'd use traditional re-sharpenable saws from then on. On a building site, though, it would still be a hardpoint. You wouldn't throw a wooden handled saw down the way hardpoints are chucked around on site. All my internal oak work was done with a hardpoint.

Hardpoints can also be used to cut bricks and blocks (then thrown away). I have an old one for plasterboard, and Onduline (tar-and-fibre) ruins any saw you use, so again, an old hardpoint is perfect. And when they're finally useless for even plasterboard, their plates make great scrapers.

 

[AndyP]

Nearly a year to fit a saw handle! What on earth have you been doing?

 

[Dr.Al]

Nearly a year to fit a saw handle! What on earth have you been doing?

He's known as a bit of a layabout and slacker our Mike. He probably spent the year watching daytime TV.

 

[Mike G]

Guilty as charged. It got shoved to the back of my finishing bench, behind a whole pile of other stuff, and forgotten.

 

[heimlaga]

I have seen those saw rivets before. On a German saw which probably had been rather cheap in it's days.

However some cheap old saws have good plate and that is the only part that really counts.

 

[Pedder]

An old German saw teeth wouldn't have been counted in PPI or TPI or any of this funny imperial system numbers.
They do it today, though and call it ZpZ, wich means Zähne pro Zoll

 

[Cabinetman]

An old German saw teeth wouldn't have been counted in PPI or TPI or any of this funny imperial system numbers.
They do it today, though and call it ZpZ, wich means Zähne pro Zoll

Interesting, and interested so I looked up the translation which would appear to be teeth per inch lol.
But out of curiosity what, if any unit of measurement did they have before metric?

 

[heimlaga]

Interesting, and interested so I looked up the translation which would appear to be teeth per inch lol.
But out of curiosity what, if any unit of measurement did they have before metric?

The lenght of one zoll (inch) varied between different parts of what is now Germany. This is one reason why the French and the Dutch and the Germans were early adaptors of metric. There were simply too many local measurement standards.

Had you Brits had Yourkshire inch and Shropshire inch and Cornish inch and Birmingham inch and lowland Scotish inch and Sutherland inch and a special local inch used only within the city of London you would also have gone metric early on. Imagine wares made in Rotherhithe to be sold in the City being returned as undersize together with a hefty fine for selling undersize wares because the city inch is 1,29mm longer than the Sussex inch used in Rotherhithe.
That was the situation in Germany.

For this reason German machine builders in the pre-metric era often got sick and tired of everything and used British inch as unit of measurement. They had imported many of their machinist's tools from Britain anyway.

 

[Cabinetman]

The lenght of one zoll (inch) varied between different parts of what is now Germany. This is one reason why the French and the Dutch and the Germans were early adaptors of metric. There were simply too many local measurement standards.

Had you Brits had Yourkshire inch and Shropshire inch and Cornish inch and Birmingham inch and lowland Scotish inch and Sutherland inch and a special local inch used only within the city of London you would also have gone metric early on. Imagine wares made in Rotherhithe to be sold in the City being returned as undersize together with a hefty fine for selling undersize wares because the city inch is 1,29mm longer than the Sussex inch used in Rotherhithe.
That was the situation in Germany.

For this reason German machine builders in the pre-metric era often got sick and tired of everything and used British inch as unit of measurement. They had imported many of their machinist's tools from Britain anyway.

Thank you, a good answer, bit like when we standardised time as well in Britain.

 

[Pedder]

I don't know, wich unit was used to count saw teeth before metric. I really wonder, if they where counted at all. Never see the pitch in an old tool catalogue.

 

[Alasdair]

Up here in Scotland we have the standard measurement unit of 'a baw hair' which is usually a "dunt" with a hammer, skiff of a plane or just a smidgen