Hand saw question

[Phil Mueller]

Looking to purchase a tenon saw...primarily rip use.
I noticed in the FWW saw review that the Lie Nielsen crosscut saw received excellent ratings for rip start, rip speed, and rip tracking...actually better ratings than for cross cut. So I'm confused.
Do I go with the crosscut assuming it does rip well and can use for crosscut as well?
Why would their crosscut do so well in rip.
Appreciate any input.

[ken hatch]

At the tooth count of back saws a rip cut saw will do double duty, only when you get into the 9 TPI or less does the difference become significant. With that said, if you can afford both saws then your crosscuts will be slightly smoother with a crosscut filed backsaw but a hybrid or rip filed saw will do a good job on either rip or crosscut. I have a LN tenon saw and it's OK but bang for buck the Vertias back saws can't be beat.

As an example: A carcass saw is big enough for most furniture tenons, a pair of Vertias carcass saws (rip and crosscut) are $140 USD. The LN carcass saw are $140 USD each. Other than looks, when the tooth meets the wood, there is no functional difference.

Full discloser, I have a saw jones with many high dollar saws in my till and a few older refurbished ones as well. They are beautiful and pleasing to the eye and touch but when it comes time to saw some wood I will reach for one of the Vertias saws as often as any of the others in my saw till. If I were starting out and wanted to own a fully functional set of saws I would buy a full set of Vertias, dovetail, carcass, and tenon saws filed for intended use for $220 USD or every saw LV makes except the "gent's" saw for less than $530 USD. Basically every saw you would ever need for about the same or less cost as one Bad Axe saw with all the bling.

ken

[Brian Loran]

What size tenon saw and for what kind of cuts? I prefer rip teeth for majority of my saws. I think they are easier to maintain and smaller teeth rip saws cross cut just fine. I use knife lines and end up planing or "cleaning up" most cross cuts anyway so rarely need a cleaner cutting cross cut saw. I do have some cross cut back saws but they are more specialist saws... and I have a major saw addiction problem

[Dave Anderson NH]

Maybe George Wilson can comment on this too. I was told several times at Colonial Williamsburg that there wasn't any evidence to support 18th century backsaws being filed crosscut. Supposedly all extant historical examples were filed rip. While I will admit to owning both x-cut and rip filed back saws I see no reason with fine toothed saws to have both tooth patterns if you score beforehand and then pare or shoulder plane the shoulders after sawing.

[paul cottingham]

Crosscut saws will bind in a rip cut eventually. Rip saws cut crosscut just fine, just a little rougher. Okay, a lot rougher.

[Jim Koepke]

I noticed in the FWW saw review that the Lie Nielsen crosscut saw received excellent ratings for rip start, rip speed, and rip tracking...actually better ratings than for cross cut. So I'm confused.

My first thought is there may have been a misidentification of this particular saw. It may have also been filed with very little fleam.

My current dovetail saw is filed rip. I have another kit of the same size to put together a matching saw with cross cut filing. So far the rip saw with 14 or 15 ppi has been doing the job of both without any problems.

jtk

[Ron Bontz]

Looking to purchase a tenon saw...primarily rip use.
I noticed in the FWW saw review that the Lie Nielsen crosscut saw received excellent ratings for rip start, rip speed, and rip tracking...actually better ratings than for cross cut. So I'm confused.
Do I go with the crosscut assuming it does rip well and can use for crosscut as well?
Why would their crosscut do so well in rip.
Appreciate any input.

The cross cut saw in question did so well because:
A) it had a 0.015" plate compared to other 0.020" 0r 0.025" plates. ( Thinner plate = less wood to remove= faster cutting action)
B) it had a 14" stroke length vs the other 12" saws. Longer stroke length = more teeth to cut with, hence faster cut.
Nothing wrong with that. Just fact.

"Primarily rip use"..............So then why buy a cross cut saw or even a "hybrid"( cross cut as well ) ? Lie Nielsen and Lee Valley both make a rip saw. Look at the plate depth as well if you are planning on doing a lot of tenons.
Lastly: A higher tooth count = smoother cut and often quite suitable for cross cutting as mentioned. Hope this helps.

[Stewie Simpson]

Its intersting that LN offer the 16" rip tenon saw at 4 1/8" usable depth in a choice of 2 saw plate gauges. 0.032 & 0.020.

0.020 at that depth of plate is not something other saw makers would normally recommend.

Stewie;

[Phil Mueller]

Thank you all! Makes more sense now, and I think I've got a better handle on what to look for.
Thanks also Stewie on the thickness comment...something I had not known to consider either.
Phil

[Mike Brady]

You are right, Stewie, about the L-N rip tenon saw in .020 plate thickness. I have that saw in the original, even deeper, plate; and it tends to drift in some woods when sawing deeper tenons. I have to use really "soft hands" when using it to avoid torquing the blade off line. I also added rake to the first inch and a half of teeth to get a less "notchy", and more accurate, start in the cut. Ultimate, I plan to cut about 1/2" off the depth and taper that plate. Lie-Nielsen and some reviewers claim that the thin plate makes the saw cut faster.

[Stewie Simpson]

Personally I would not recommend going any deeper than 2 1/2" inches of unsupported blade with 0.020 gauge.

[Stewie Simpson]

Maybe George Wilson can comment on this too. I was told several times at Colonial Williamsburg that there wasn't any evidence to support 18th century backsaws being filed crosscut. Supposedly all extant historical examples were filed rip. While I will admit to owning both x-cut and rip filed back saws I see no reason with fine toothed saws to have both tooth patterns if you score beforehand and then pare or shoulder plane the shoulders after sawing.

Hi Dave. That was my understanding, but was under the impression the time line did extend part way into the 19th century. Interesting topic requiring further discussion.

Stewie;

[Robert Engel]

I have the Veritas dovetail/xcut set with the resin spines.
A bit skeptical at first, but I am very happy with them.

I would expect their tenon saw to be of equal value.
Might be worth a look.

[paul cottingham]

I seriously love the LV saws. I have a full set of them, save their tenon saws, which i find heavy and strangely balanced. And im a big guy, so i cant imagine how a smaller person could use them. I own a couple of late 19th/early 20th century disston tennon saws that i really love along with a Bad Axe sash saw.

[george wilson]

Let me say that THE ONLY original,unused saws from the 18th. C. that I have heard of were the ones in the Seaton Chest. I looked at the crosscut saws when I was tasked with the making of crosscut and rip saws. Though unused,the teeth were very dark and hard to see tool marks on. I was not able to undertake looking at them under a microscope. My job was to figure out how to make all kinds of tools efficiently(or at all !). I left the research to researchers for the most part. The building part took up my time.

Jay Gaynor said he did not think the crosscut saws were filed at tooth angles like today's saws,but were filed straight across. So,we made the reproduction Kenyon crosscut saws filed straight across. They did not cut as well as the modern configuration saws will cut. So,the Cabinet Shop refiled their saws into the modern configuration.

When I had time to think about it more,I began to wonder if those original saws were just NOT SHARPENED. It was usual in those days for tools to be supplied in their most basic form. That is,chisels were supplied without handles. Chisels and carving tools were certainly not sharpened beyond their bevels being ground up to where the craftsman could finish the job. It was also considered a normal part of carpenters and cabinet maker's skill sets to be able to sharpen their own saws. This has faded away these days due to a less vigorous apprenticeship (if any at all,these days). Personally,I do not think any craftsman who uses saws on a regular basis in the museum should be awarded the title of journeyman unless he can sharpen his own saws and other tools properly.

Indeed,it is possible that the saw teeth I examined were only partially established. I don't know if Jay considered that. Jay was not a long time practicing woodworking craftsman himself,so I'm not sure of the amount of practical knowledge he had. One thing Jay said that I thought was very strange was that he thought all planes chattered in the 18th. C.. That simply is not true as I can attest after many years of using wooden planes,and being in the same building as the Cabinet Maker.

So,with the extreme rarity of totally unused saws from the period,we will probably never know the answer. But,I easily saw the difference in cutting performance between straight across filed crosscut teeth,and teeth filed at angles as we do today. Experienced craftsmen were not stupid in those days,and indeed had to be quite smart to get by with the simpler means they had at their disposals. So,I'd be suspicious that they figured out how to make their saws cut the best way. It isn't very complicated after all,and by the 18th. C. saws had been in use in various forms,for thousands of years.