A Lot of Saws and SMCs Own George Wilson

[george wilson]

Apple was used for the best saws of Disston,Simmonds,and other fine makers long ago. It's hard to find apple that hasn't got grey streaks in it,and not from spalting. Once I had some plum wood. It was beautiful,light lavender colored. That probably would have easily faded away. I let someone have it.

[Joel Moskowitz]

Applewood is beautiful stuff. not as nice I think as beech from a use standpoint but nicer to look at.

[george wilson]

Is it possible beech was used because it was cheap and plentiful? I read back in the early 70's,in a book by Salomon (IIRC) that beech was used because it was so stable. That was a complete myth I found out later. In 1986,when I became toolmaker,we cut 5000 bd.ft. of beechwood,because you can't get it commercially. They seem to use it for pallets.

That wood twisted and warped worse than any wood I've ever seen. I had to make a cooper's jointer from beech many years later. We selected a 6"X6",and took it from the unheated garage we stored it in,to acclimate in the shop. We planed it square months later,just enough to clean it up. It twisted. Months later,we squared it up again. Again,it slowly took a twist. This went on for over a year. Finally,we got it down to the size we had to have it. It stopped twisting,luckily.

I've never seen such unstable wood. In England they used beech only on the cheapest grade of furniture. I've seen it on old,cheap grade English furniture that came out of old hotels over there,and was sold at auction houses to pass for antiques.

Beech is also not very good for turning. It is always hairy on the surface.

[Joel Moskowitz]

beech is very unstable. Air dried beech is better but for tools QS beech is the only way to go. For saw handles and plane bodies it MUST be QS for chisel handles it doesn't matter although we use air dried stuff for for the mortise chisels. Occasioanlly we get weird grain and the handle fails pretty quickly. But otherwise it makes a wonderful handle with a nice feel to it.

[Brian Ward]

I wouldn't call beech stable by any stretch of the imagination, but it does seem to have its utility for a reason. Clark and Williams offer this article on why they (and presumably traditional makers) used it for planes: http://www.planemaker.com/articles_beech.html

Now, yeah, it is quite available in Europe. I'm just pulling this out of my butt, but the reason might be that it was the only tree that was so tough that the Romans didn't bother chopping it down. (At least, a lot of big American beech trees remain here because they were just too much of a pain to cut down.)

[Brian Ward]

Regarding why it's a pain to cut down a beech, think about big trees of both genera--a 4' diameter beech versus a 2' diameter maple. You'd have to go through 12.56 square feet of beech versus 3.14 square feet of maple.

If I were a Roman or even early American logger dude (and thus, didn't have a chainsaw), I think I'd probably skip the beech. If I were going after a fat tree, I'd go after some oak--after all, the wood is a lot easier to deal with and you can do a lot more with it.

[george wilson]

Joel,I've deleted the message. as I said,it was a suspicion only.

Brian,I never saw a beech that big around here. Maybe they are in England. Of course,a bigger tree is going to be harder to cut down. Around here,2' is about the limit. Then.they seem to have developed about an 8" diameter rotted center.

I have seen huge oaks,too. Wouldn't a 4' oak be trouble to cut down?

I don't see a lot of future in debating what properties beech has. I can only relate real experiences I actually had. My partner Jon cuts up trees all the time. Even bought empty tractor trailer bodys to store wood in. He cuts walnut,maple,cherry,several types of hardwoods. He wants to be in the wood business,having access to a sawmill a friend rents to him cheap. the beech is the worst we have seen as to movement,and warping. That is all I can tell you about it. I think they used it due to plentiful nature. I don't really have much more to say than that,having had my experiences. If you want to go and cut down large quantities of hardwoods,please report back on your findings. That's all I can do.

[Brian Ward]

Brian, I never saw a beech that big around here. Maybe they are in England. Of course,a bigger tree is going to be harder to cut down. Around here, 2' is about the limit. Then.they seem to have developed about an 8" diameter rotted center.

Remember the context: Roman and early American times, and this means old-growth forests. Old-growth beeches of both Fagus sylvatica and F. grandfolia can be quite big trees. Beeches can put up with a variety of crummy soil conditions, but when it's good, they get quite large. Attached is a picture of me in front of a fairly young example of ornamental F. sylvatica in Rhode Island. It's about 3.5', maybe.

I have seen huge oaks, too. Wouldn't a 4' oak be trouble to cut down?

Sure thing. Important, though, is that the timber yield is far more valuable, which may make such a large oak harvest worthwhile. I mean, sure, I like beech a lot, but it is a pain to work with and it's so unstable. It's even a pain to split for firewood. Who wants to deal with that?

Anyways, we're kind of getting away from saws here.

[george wilson]

Yeah,but we AIN'T GOT NO ROMAN beech trees around here!! Nor early American trees. Even back in colonial times,the wood for quite some distance around here was soon cut away for fuel,and making charcoal.They even had no trees in Williamsburg,because they wanted the town to look like a city,and not a colonial outpost. Must have looked pretty sparce back then. Today,in spite of all the trouble to make the museum authentic,glaringly inauthentic trees grace the streets because we see them as attractive today.

[Brian Ward]

Hehe, yeah, I think we're talking about two different things here.

I'm not sure that I'd want any beech from around that area either, wasn't a lot of it kind of swampy at some point?

[george wilson]

Yes,I think they drained it early on. Not much swamp,now.

[Larry Williams]

Joel,I've deleted the message. as I said,it was a suspicion only....

George,

A customer forwarded your message to us. I've been trying to figure out how to reply without making this a bigger mess. Even though you've deleted the message, I'm not sure who all may have read it.

I can only guess what may have motivated you to post about your unfounded suspicion but you have called our integrity into question. That alone could make it very difficult for us to gain access to other important collections. I don't see that we have an choice other than to clear this up.

Common sense should tell everyone who read that post that your former employer doesn't just leave rare old tools laying around for people to have casual access to them. We feel very privileged to have been given access to the study collection they have. Readers should be aware that access to that study collection requires going through two layers of security. The times we were there we were both signed in and escorted by George's former supervisor. On entry we were issued white cotton gloves and were under constant supervision. We were never left alone.

Some items in the collection are on open shelves but many are boxed on the shelves. We didn't simply paw through those boxes but were shown items we asked about. I don't recall seeing a single early saw, I know we didn't ask to see any and we weren't shown any. We don't make saws and have no plans to do so. Why would we have been looking at saws?

We feel fortunate that we've been sent photos of items in the collection when we've requested them. We've also received measured drawings. There is absolutely no reason we would have attempted what George evidently "suspects."

Have we duplicated anything produced by George's shop? Yes, we were once sent a fore plane and asked to make one single plane based on that design for one of the resident craftsmen. That is the one time we even had access to anything George or Jon produced. I do still have the brief note requesting we do that but I'd rather not make that communication public unless George insists. I do hope he won't but if he does, I do intend to remove the names of others involved.

In the future George, if you have suspicions or questions about us or our company, please contact us directly. Please leave us out of your airing the laundry between you and your former employer.

[george wilson]

Larry,I did delete the post within a few minutes. What happened was someone traced all of the tools we had on display in our shop during a crowded forum. These were not old tools,but accurate reproductions we had made. That's all I am going to say. I am sorry to have made the posting in the first place.I think a total lack of communication to my shop,not your fault,about items you were permitted to reproduce caused my incorrect suspicions. A lapse of judgement on my part,quickly deleted. I apologize to you. This has nothing to do with my former employer. I never even mentioned it to him. No harm has been done to you.

[Larry Williams]

...What happened was someone traced all of the tools we had on display in our shop during a crowded forum. These were not old tools,but accurate reproductions we had made. That's all I am going to say. ...

George,

Let me add we weren't there for your "crowded forum." Bill and I were in your shop one time for maybe 30 to 45 minutes in 1997. The time we were there, the only people present were Bill, me, you, Jon and the person who was your supervisor. Again, we were never left alone. The only completed tool you showed us was an ebony and ivory spoke shave and we saw your first run of bench planes nearing completion. I don't see where you had a single basis for your "suspicion" or for publicly connecting us to what you think happened.