Disappointed with Grobet USA Files

[Gary Herrmann]

Be careful when purchasing on the bay. I recently bought a box of "NOS 5" xx slim files made in the US." I asked if the files were stamped made in the USA. Seller said yes.

So I bought them. They arrived yesterday. They're going back today. Definitely NOT made in the US. The box says US, just not made in the US. In the fine print I found Mexico.

I'm giving the seller the benefit of the doubt that she didn't know where to look.

[David Weaver]

AT this point, I haven't seen anything on ebay at all that makes stuff worth purchasing there - in terms of taper saw files, at least.

If you want pillar files or barrette files or things for metalwork, that's where you can make some hay there. But saw files are overpriced there, and if you have to buy any quantity, it's better to go to the folks who are either importing a brand or who are drop shipping.

[george wilson]

I wish Vallorbes were still made. I bought a set of vallorbe 4" needle files years ago from Gesswein. They have very coarse teeth for such small files,and I value them very much for wood especially. Some years later,I decided to get more sets from Gesswein. They sent 4" Grobets. The teeth were MUCH smaller,not what I was expecting or wanting. They told me that Grobet had taken over Vallorbe. Unfortunately, they didn't make them exactly the same. I have no idea of the year these events happened.

Vallorbe was an old company. I have a few very old Vallorbes that are beautifully made,and even have little,precise nicks along their tangs to give a better grip in the handle. You know they're old when they have nicks on the tangs.

[Brett Gregory]

For the past 5 weeks I have been doing exhaustive research on Saw Files, with a view to solving the current problems once and for all (i.e. get some proper files made again - it's nowhere near as hard as you might think)


This is a (genuine) Swiss manufactured Needle File. Note the grinding smoothness of the shoulder, which is indicative of the whole blank before toothing.


That nice smooth grinding of the blank leads to nice clean teeth like this:


Even the labelling is done with pride:


That's a Needle file that is genuinely made in Swizterland.


By contrast, here is a file from the same brand, that is manufactured "elsewhere":


That lousy grinding leads to teeth like this (and no, they are not double cut, as the Needle file is):


and that leads to this:



The pride of workmanship and house branding can be seen in how the logos are placed on the files:






Are you seeing any similarities between all these files?

The grinding is the same
The tooth forming is the same
The steel colour is the same
They all have printed logos
The logos are all the same smudged black ink, and the same font


Other than that, the differences are.....what, exactly?


That poor standard of gringing leads to what may as well be a double cut tooth pattern - which is eschewed for Saw Files because it doesn't yield a good surface.

I go back to my Plane Blade analogy: you must have polished surfaces to get a proper edge. We do not need (even close) to a polished surface for a file blank. However, I do believe that they should at least not be ground with a rock picked up from the yard (I know that's a cheaper method, but really....)

Regards
Brett

PS - if you can't see the pics then please let me know - I may be the only one able to see them, for technical reasons.

[Brett Gregory]

As far as Quality Control goes, this is a shining example of it just not existing at all. It's a 6" Extra Slim:





Funnily enough, it didn't come with a warning to wear Safety Spectacles. 9/10 files in this box were like this - straight from the volcano. They were replaced, but that's not the point - just more time and effort required.

[Brett Gregory]

By now, I guess you are aware of my goal - to get proper saw files made once more. This is being done in collaboration with people who really know what they are talking about (I'm a novice). I will post the results of my survey in the next post.

There are two distinct, and fairly evenly split camps on the vitues of a taper amongst these 15 experts from around the globe. Those who want it back (as it used to be) and those who struggle to see the benefit. It comes down to personal preference, as Nicholson reflected in their 1942 Catalogue, and I quote:

"Handsaw Blunt Files are frequently preferred to Handsaw Taper Files by carpenters and other EXPERT saw filers for sharpening handsaws with 60° teeth. They are parallel in width and thickness but their tooth construction is identical with Handsaw Taper Files. Edges set and cut to file the gullets between the saw teeth."

So, there has always been two camps. We should not forget a couple of very important points that are supremely relevant:

1. The were no power saws in those days, so saw filing was critically important, and was done by every professional woodworker on an almost daily basis (particularly here in Oz where they were using ultra hard timbers for housing construction during the MASSIVE housing boom after ww2)
2. The situation is now reversed so that most pros use power saws with TC tipped teeth, and it is primarily amateur woodworkers who are doing the saw filing. Only a few of this group can class themselves as "experts".
What we can glean from that is that a parallel file is ONLY for experts, and so by default, a taper file must make things easier, or more reliable, in some way for the non-expert.

One of the collaborators is Mark Aylward (aka "Claw Hama" over here). He has been classically trained in the art of filing TWICE in two apprenticeships, and these days he is a professional woodworker. Mark is also an excellent lateral thinker (as Tradesmen tend to be). He just wants to get the job done.

His thoughts on the taper are as follows:
The taper serves several purposes as I have been told and taught over the years from my Grandfather, school teachers and reading material etc.

1. By placing the small tapered end in the gullet you can see the teeth, angles etc clearly before starting your stroke.

2. A constant even taper allows you to push through the full length of the stroke and keep even cutting pressure on the file and consequently the teeth. You don't want a shoulder at some point along the way to change or alter your nice steady flow of your cut.

3. Even if filed badly there is still a good chance you will get a (leading) cutting edge on your tooth with the small built in fleam from the angle on the file. Even a Rip saw can commonly have 4° fleam, so 5° ish with the angle of the file. This small amount of fleam on a Rip saw is to help keep your saw cut clean and not too furry. Also once you have sharpened and set your saw you should do a light run down the edges with an oil or diamond stone to get rid of any little burrs or edges that may catch in your kerf.

All this is still on the side of the tooth on a rip saw when most/all of the cutting is done on the pitch/tip of the tooth with a Rip saw (as you all know) The angle of attack on this is adjusted with your rake angle. The tip of the tooth with a 4° fleam will have a slight angle across it but if you look at a lot of the high tech circular saw blades these days they have exactly that also. Shouldn't make much difference one way or the other to your hand saw. (only my humble opinion).

In other words, as you start from the toe, by keeping constant force in the push, the file gradually begins removing metal on the way through, so the taper compensates for this ever increasing gullet width (microscopically) and so there is always constant contact and the same pressure being applied.

Of course I accept, as does Mark, that different people will have different positions on some of these finer points (e.g. fleam).

So, what is meant by a proper taper?

Here is a picture of three files. The middle one is from Claw Hama (so we don't get our Marks confused). Either side are a Grobet "Swiss" and an F.Dick and they were both delivered to me in the last week or so. What's that? You can't see any difference in them? Neither can I, and I'd be prepared to bet things very precious to me that they both come out of the same factory.

The middle file is a Wiltshire Austalia made around 1940-1950, and is Mark's favourite file by far (although he can't use it forever).



I'll have a bit more to say about the Grobet & F.Dick, but for the moment let's concentrate on the taper. Ok, ok, they have no taper to concentrate on, so let's move on.

I think we can accept that Claw's 1940 Wiltshire is the benchmark for taper shape. With that in mind I have measured the taper more thoroughly, dividing it into eight 10mm sections down the 80mm toothed area, and this shows that that taper is a very gentle curve, not a straight line. I did separate measurements for all three sides, and will show the averages.

Going from the shoulder down to the toe, the average angle of taper every 10mm is as follows:

0.2°
0.2°
0.3°
0.5°
0.9°
1.2°
1.7°
2.1°
and the average of the whole taper is 0.9°.

This shows that in the first third the taper is almost non-existent, starts to get going a bit in the middle third, building up to the maximum taper in the toe third. So no real surprise there, as it can be seen visually.

IMPORTANT: When I first started on this analytical journey a month ago, I couldn't for the life of me see why the taper was so important to some people. However, when I saw what Claw was on about it came to me all at once: the taper compensates for metal loss as the stroke progresses and keeps everything even and constant throughout the stroke. Damned obvious when you see the real deal eh?

So yes, I am prepared to change my position in the face of supporting evidence and good argument. This is science, not stalwart opinion. I had originally planned to design a range of non-tapered files to present to the manufacturer, and they would have had a longer toothed area for each relative size, so that a good stroke length can be achieved - thus more efiicient. Not having a taper would also hhave meant that the number of different files could be significantly reduced (and that's really complex and long winded to explain)

The situation now is that a proper taper range (with proper corner radii and toothing) will be the first priority, and blunt-end, untapered files will still be on the burner, but at a lower heat. EDIT: the heat may have to be turned up, as some of the former taper lovers begin to change their opinion (some have since been exposed to an excellent parallel file - Japanese made, but available in the USA in one size only, equivalent to a 5" xxSlim).

Regards
Brett

[Brett Gregory]

Some of these opinions may be changing (with reference to the need for a taper).

[Brett Gregory]

Firstly, I want to make it clear that this is not a commercial venture for me.

I now have 26 files assembled from different brands and sizes. The logos have been ground off, and they are engraved with a unique number. Three very experienced Saw Filers over here will then have one corner each to assess, and they will be using the same piece of saw plate for this, to keep everything equal. It will be a "blind" test.

Within these 26 files are 6 pairs of identical files. One of each pair has been "sharpened" in a hot Citric Acid bath for three hours. The testers will be asked to make a direct comparison between the files in each pair to see if there is a difference in sharpness, and if so does it last. I must say that both to the skin and under a loupe there is a remarkable difference in sharpness. They are far more "grabby" to the skin, and the edges look MUCH cleaner. Whether or not this translates to better performance remains to be seen.

From there, I will be preparing an extensive document for presentation to the manufacturer, along with the petition. It will include survey results from the 15 collaborators on what they would like to see, test results from the three Aussies on all the files available currently, a list of petition signatories & comments, careful documentation of the current problems, and new design specifications in great detail.

I would like to think that I will see a prototype in around 3-4 months. These will be sent to the collaborators (15, maybe more by then) for assessment, followed by a little tweaking, and then production.

These are the "before" shots of the files before being sent to the first tester (last Thursday 4th July 2013).


4" DEST Group:



5" DEST:



6" DEST:



5" EST:



6" EST:



4" ST:



6" ST:



6" RT:



Needle Files:



There are actually three other Needle files being included, but they are already with the first tester, so can't be photographed before.

Regards
Brett

[John Bates]

Try Tome files from Portugal, made in Portugal.

[Brett Gregory]

One of the collaborators had this to say:
"Brett,

Allow me to add just a bit of a mixture of information mixed with some opinion...regarding a file with taper versus one that is straight.

When filing straight across when filing a conventional rip tooth, for example, the taper allows the file to first file at a slight angle as if filing a slopped gullet. As the file is pushed forward it is then filing on a level plane. The taper makes it easier to start the forward stroke and it causes the file to be a tad more aggressive as it begins to cut the metal.

In practice, I don't think the taper is needed. It is a matter of downward pressure from the start of the stroke to the end of the stroke. I would find it to be a more consistent stroke when not having to compensate for the taper.

To produce files that are not tapered, the manufacturer might consider forming the triangular shape through a die in long lengths and perhaps even grind them in long lengths. Then cut them to useable lengths and then add the teeth and a tang. Not being tapered would make the file less subject to breaking at the toe end under certain circumstances.

Not all, but many saw filers use a rake angle guide attached to the toe end of the file. Different type of guides are used with different means of attaching them to the end of the file. Without the taper, it would be easier to attach the rake angle guide.

Most files we presently buy have larger teeth on the larger files. I would like to have larger files with finer teeth. Consider the thickness of a typical saw blade. Regardless of how large the teeth, such as say, 5PPI rip tooth or an 8PPI crosscut tooth, the blade thickness is very close to the same. The number of teeth on a large file should be the same as on a smaller file and all should be single cut. When I file a 5PPI rip saw, I actually use a 6" file that has a width that barely covers the filing of the backside of the teeth. The old rule of using a file with a width twice the size of the back of the tooth just doesn't apply here, in my opinion. A file that is twice the size is huge and the teeth are coarse, hence, producing a rough cut and ear splitting screeching and vibration. I no longer have a use for the larger 8" files. However, if they had finer teeth, they would work just fine. After all, we are not filing a block of steel, we are filing a very thin sheet of spring steel on edge. It seems that people who make the files do not use them to file saws."

And my response:
I agree with that entirely, and I have made a number of posts on my home forum about just that. Taking the extreme example of a 2 tpi (3ppi) saw that has plate about 1.5-2mm thick, the recommended file (according to the DIN standard) has teeth that are about 10 teeth per centimetre (tpc) which means they are 1mm per tooth. There is NO WAY that file could be actioned across the saw plate, and certainly not without screeching to rival a Sulphur Crested Cockatoo. The chronic vibration would result in an appalling finish.

The point you raise about the surface area involved is spot on. In that same saw (above) the surface area being filed is 12.7 x 2 x 2 = 51 sq mm or about the same as a 9/32" square. So, as you say, the amount of metal being filed (even on a monster saw) is tiny.

In fact, I am quite seriously considering that the files should be Cut 1 (or Smooth), rather than Cut 2, and with perhaps a second version available as a Bastard for major rehabbing or new tooth forming. It could even be a double cut Bastard - basically for hogging off, followed by the Smooth for finishing.

Furthermore, I contend that the people who are user Needle files are doing so for either or both of the following reasons:
1. a decent 4" DEST hasn't been seen in the wild for quite some time
2. in any case, the teeth were always too coarse for very fine teeth

In fact a Needle isn't really appropriate because it is double cut (coarser finish), but mainly because it is 3 Square, leaving a sharp gullet - granted, it's not such a big deal with fine teeth, but my point is that a Needle is really only a substitute.

Indeed, I see scope for a 3" or 3.5" DEST. It couldn't be longer because as a taper it would be too skinny at the toe and would just snap.

The following chart comes from the Pferd catalogue and shows the DIN standards. Have a look on the right about the justfication for the tpc in different sized files(under "Example"). Who cares whether a 12" file "feels" the same as a 4" file. It's completely irrelevant! Like, I'm filing a 5tpi saw, and then a 15tpi, and I'm soooo glad that the file feels the same to push!

I reckon that's just a carry over from normal filing of larger lumps of metal, and someone forgot to think it through with Saw Files.



Now as far as your thoughts on the taper verses parallel files are concerned, I originally was bagging out the tapers (bigtime) because I just couldn't see the point of a miserable little bit of taper, only at the toe. THEN I saw a proper taper and it all became crystal clear to me, after discussion with Mark Aylward (Claw Hama, and one of the three testers). I am now a Believer man!

So, because there are two evenly split camps on the taper, that says to me that the market dictates that both taper and parallel need to exist. The range of parallels can be small because they can be longer without the taper complicating things. Again, this was my first thoughts, and I have specified a range of parallels, and as I recall it reduced the number of files from 12 to 7 (or similar).

In any case, all those specifications will be done in conjunction with the collaborators. I see the first three prototypes as being:

1. a 4" DEST, Smooth, Single cut
2. a 6" parallel with a 4mm face (sorry to keep mixing imperial with metric, but I'm bilingual, and they both have their uses)
3. as above but a double cut Bastard (for hogging out new teeth, or major rehabbing)

[Brett Gregory]

Try Tome files from Portugal, made in Portugal.

Hi John
Tome make the files for Bahco, and whilst they seem to be the pick of the current bunch (opinion of various people) there are still problems with them such as crumbling corners, and almost no taper whatsoever. They are at least made from Swedish Sandvik steel. AFAIK Tome have xxSlim files, but Bahco no longer avail themselves to them (not sure why). The Bahco Needle files are actually labelled "Bahco Oberg Swiss made", and what's more they look Swiss made. Oberg was one of the fine old Swedish File Makers that Bahco purchased. Bahco is owned by SNA Europe, aka Snap On Tools.

There are only three files "mainstream" file factories left in Europe:
UMV/Vallorbe/Glardon (Swiss), who only make Needle Files and Precision Engineer's & Diesinker's files. They produce no Saw Files whatsoever.
Honauer (Swiss), who only make more or less the same as above
Tome Feriera (Portugal), as you have raised.

Stahlwille do actually make their own files in Germany, but the range is so small as to not be worth considering, and with no Saw Files at all.

There is another manufacturer, but as I alluded to before, nobody outside of Europe will be aware of them, except perhaps for one of their other range of tools, which is just gaining recognition in the US.

Regards
Brett

[David Weaver]

Of what I've seen so far, the bahcos are top choice over here because they can be gotten in quantity for about $5 per, and thus far, I haven't seen any issues with them. I can get by without xx slim without issue, though I am filing mostly my saws, so if the gullet is rounded a little bit for a file a size too big, it makes little difference.

The tall order in finding someone to make quality files will be in getting them to do it at a price where the value of the files is actually better than bahcos, india simonds, et. al, where someone filing a saw will get more work done with the same unit of currency spent. I do think that's a fairly tall order. I can be tolerant of a couple of duds if the value overall is good, and duds means a file or two that is slightly crumbly, but not totally unusable right out of the box.

As far as the taper goes, I haven't paid too much attention to it, but is there a definitive description of why it's there? I'd venture to guess it starts the file on a slight uphill track and allows the file to bite easier without skidding.

[Brett Gregory]

As far as the taper goes, I haven't paid too much attention to it, but is there a definitive description of why it's there? I'd venture to guess it starts the file on a slight uphill track and allows the file to bite easier without skidding.

Post #51, blue copy.

[David Weaver]

Ahh, i missed in in the volumes of information. The second file in that picture is fabulous. The top and the bottom ones look like the grobet usa files I purchased, including the broken out teeth and the bizarre hourglass shape (that the top one shows).

[Brett Gregory]

Ahh, i missed in in the volumes of information.

Yeah, sorry about that - the distillation of 5 weeks work.

The second file in that picture is fabulous. The top and the bottom ones look like the grobet usa files I purchased, including the broken out teeth and the bizarre hourglass shape.

That Wiltshire is made the same as the good old Nicholsons were. Of the other two, one is an F.Dick (made in India) and the other is a Grobet USA - it doesn't look any different does it? There's a reason for that.