The Gramercy Tools Bow Saw - Design Considerations
Introduction
When we endeavour to
introduce a new tool, the first consideration is what the optimum
design for the tool should be. Though it might be tempting, we do not
want to slavishly copy an old pattern. This is because one generally
does not know enough about the context in
which the design arose or
exactly what the tool was originally used for. Sadly, too many designs
have been "dumbed down" over the years, mostly because of cost. When
we saw that there was a need for a really great turning saw, we wanted
to make sure that we understood the classic saws’ engineering so as to
reproduce only their best features.
First, a bit on
terminology. Any saw with a blade tensioned in a frame is generally
referred to as a frame saw. To this day, European woodworkers
use frame saws of around two feet long, with wide blades to do all
their main cutting of boards. In the English and American traditions
(after 1700 or so) woodworkers used handsaws for those tasks, and a
narrow-tensioned blade in a frame saw only for cutting curves. These
smaller saws are typically called either bow saws or turning saws.
Very small versions with blades of around 6 inches are known as coping
saws, and are naturally used for coping joints and other intricate
work. The frame consists of a pair of mortised cheeks held
apart by a tenoned cross-member called the stretcher. The
hardware, or pins, hold the blade in the cheeks and also
provide a mount for the handles. Finally, the tension on the blade is
kept by a twisted cord, a Spanish windlass type of traction device
kept from unwinding by the all-important toggle. The typical
full-sized bow saw has a distance between the cheeks of about 8 -16
inches - typically 12 inches. This is the type of saw we wanted to
reintroduce.
We looked at every
bow saw we could find, yet, there are very few bow saws with a known
history that have remained unchanged from a documented era of
production. Two saws in particular
fit that bill: one in the
Seaton Tool Chest in England and another in the Duncan Phyfe Tool
Chest at the New York Historical Society. We also looked to the bow
saws in our collection, including an interesting one from the late 19th
century.
The task at hand was
then to understand why each part of the saw was built the way it was.
The Blade
The blade on all the
saws we looked at was a ¼" wide band, held to the frame by a hole
drilled into the blade and pinned with a loose pin or a short nail.
All the modern bow saw makers we know use lengths of band-saw blades.
We hated the modern
blades. What works for a powered band saw is usually too aggressive or
too dull for a hand saw. They are almost always too wide as well,
which means you can’t cut a really tight circle. That said, it’s not
so easy to drill a centred, 1/16" hole on a blade that is much
narrower. The antique saws had blades that were also ¼" wide, but only
at the ends for drilling the pin holes, the part with the teeth was
considerably narrower - making for a 3/16" or 1/8" wide blade, with
the gullets of teeth moving to the centreline of the blade. These
dimensions give a tighter turning radius.
We thought about
re-grinding the backs of band saw blades to create narrower blades,
but modern band saw blades are more brittle, and we don’t like having
the line of teeth off-centred.
Also, changing a
blade fastened with loose pins can be a pain the neck. You need to
knock out the pins without dropping them, and that’s no fun. Then we
had an idea; why not use coping saw blades? They’re narrow,
inexpensive, and since the cross-pins are already installed, you can
just hook them into the frame.
As far as we know, we
are the first company to offer 12" coping saw blades. They work like a
charm! They’re even narrower than most early turning saw blades, so
you can saw very tight radii (just like a coping saw), but with a
longer, faster, and smoother stroke and switching out blades is
trivial. Problem solved!
There is, of course,
the question; should the saw cut on the pull or push stroke? The
advantage of saws that cut on the pull stroke is that the blade stays
in tension, but in a frame saw the blade is in tension anyway and by
pushing you get a lot more power. We tested both ways many times and
with the right blade, pushing seems to work much better for most
applications.
The Pins
The next problem was
fitting the blade to the frame. Some more primitive bow saws used
wooden fittings, but we felt that the cross-pins would eat at the wood
over time. All the professionally made bow saws we examined used brass
fittings. No problem!
We machined a ¼" brass
shaft with a slot and a hook in it. We also decided to include a
regular hole so you could use old-style or wide blades. The pin has a
shoulder machined in it eliminating worry about constant tension
pulling the brass out of the handle.
Another design issue:
how to attach the handle to the brass? Some modern saws use an obvious
solution – cross-pinning the handles to the brass. It’s not that hard
to do, but we wanted to offer a kit that could allow everyone to make
a saw. That meant adding cross-pins to the kit, and the need to locate
and drill through metal and wood rounds together. This is a real
problem if you don’t have the right tools. Gluing the hardware into
the handle is simple enough, but brass doesn’t readily stick to glue.
So, our ultimate solution was to cut some grooves in the shaft and
then file a single flat. When the glue hardens in the handle, it
catches in the grooves to prevent pulling out. Glue on the flat
prevents the brass from turning in the wood. With the tension on the
blade taken firmly by the brass shoulder, the glue doesn’t even have
to be very strong.
Note:
Holtzapffel’s, great 19th century English compendium of
tools and craft, illustrates a turning saw with loose pinned blades,
but a hooked pin is on only one side, "so that the saw may be removed
sideways from the one handle, and allowed to move as on a joint upon
the other, a provision that is often turned to a useful account." We
have no evidence that this design was ever manufactured in the 19th
century.
The Handles
How big should the handles be? Why are the handles the way they are?
Is the bigger handle on the old saws really too short for a modern
hand? There is a common thought that woodworkers today have bigger
hands so the handles need to be a little bigger than what’s found on
an antique. But how much bigger? A frame saw has two handles: a short
and stubby one, called the toe, that is farther away from the
user, and a closer one, which is bigger in all respects and used by
the hand that pushes the saw.
Then it hit us---The
toe is only really used to turn the blade in relationship to the
cheeks. You wouldn’t normally hold on to it while sawing.
The handle is where
all the action takes place and here is where understanding how
traditional saws are used is helpful. All western saws (and planes)
are used with the forefinger extended, like gripping a pistol. It
gives control. What happens when you extend your forefinger so that
it rests on the frame of the saw? First of all, you need a short
enough handle to bring your hand close to the frame, but in use, we
got all the control that we needed to cut fast, accurate curves. It
was really something. On some early saws we noticed a slight concavity
in the cheek, next to the handle--- a feature that disappeared in the
mid-to-late 19th century saws. Originally, we thought was
ornamental— some over-sculpting. Now we believe it to be the saw’s
finger rest, an important feature that we chose to include on our
saws.
Finally, the handle
needs to be short enough to rest in the palm of your hand. This way,
your entire arm aligns behind the saw blade and it will be easy to saw
straight. Too long a handle tilts the hand off to the side and the saw
becomes harder to control.
Note: In many 20th
century woodworking instructions books, including ones by noted
authors Bernard Jones and Charles Hayward, a two handed grip is shown.
We have also noted the two handed grip in some early 20th century shop
photographs. We think that the reason for the two handed grip, where
one hand is holding on much as we demonstrate and the other hand is
held over the first hand and also grips the cheek, comes from heavier
saw frames of the post 1850 era where the frame was too heavy to stay
in place as the saw was turned to saw a curve. A second hand keeps
some of the weight off of the saw so you can turn it easily and it
prevents the frame from twisting unpredictably. We find in tests that
the two handed hold works but there is a loss in stroke, some speed,
and it is more awkward and there is a loss of control. However if your
saw frame turns under the weight of the cheeks it is the only grip
that allows predictable results.
The Frame
The early turning saws we looked at all had very thin, almost spidery
frames. The reason for this, of course, is that the weight of the
frame will influence the cut. When you turn the saw in the cut, you
want the entire saw frame to move, so that the blade stays straight in
the frame. A beefy frame will cause the saw to feel top-heavy in use.
The handle will move with respect to the frame, twist the blade, and
the cut will meander. We wanted a thin nimble frame.
This brings us to the
question of the wood. A turning saw can be made from almost any wood
that can take a little tension. The bigger the saw, the more tension
it can take. A lighter-weight wood is preferable because of the
nimbleness factor outlined above. The traditional wood that English
companies used for these saws is beech, which works fine.
However, good quality,
straight-grained beech is hard to find in quantity. In the United
States, we have oodles of great wood that is flexible, tough, and can
tolerate a lot of tension: Hickory. Our saw is made of American
Hickory. It is only slightly more than 11/16" thick at its thickest
with the cheeks thinning toward the top. The stretcher is held in
place with a shallow mortise that is intentionally over-long. The
mortise exists to register the stretcher. A little slop allows the saw
frame to adjust slightly as it goes under tension. We have seen saws
where the stretcher is mortised in to the cheeks with a curved joint.
This is handy when dealing with many different lengths of saw blade
but with hickory, which is flexible, and of course with our factory
made blades, consistent length isn’t a problem. So, initially we
elected to use straight mortise joints. However, upon further thought
we realized with the extra hole our pins offer it would allow the use
of a fairly wide range of blades and we decided to go with a curved
mortise face.
Note: Bow saws in
Vietnam (and perhaps other places) are used for everything, and the
saw-makers there don’t bother with mortising. The stretch is butted to
the stiles and held in place by tension. This system works fine and
greatly simplifies construction.
Another issue was
where to put the stretcher in relationship to the cheeks. We found the
positioning on the old saws, with the stretcher slightly above the
midline of the frame, to function the best. This provides a little
more depth of cut without throwing the weight of the saw too far back.
Tension
The next thing to consider: how to tension the frame. We found several
methods to choose from: (1) A twisted rope held in place with some
sort of a toggle that rests against the stretcher which is the most
popular method in the English and American tradition. (2) Catalogues
from the later 19th
century show a sort of steel turnbuckle in the middle. This appealed
to our mechanical sensibilities, but otherwise isn’t stylistically
pleasing and wasn’t very popular. (3) In Europe, modern big frame saws
usually have a threaded rod with a wing nut at one end. Again, not a
very elegant solution. (4) In Vietnam, the frame is held in tension by
a wood or metal hook, and a nut at the end of the blade holder
tensions the blade. We liked the Vietnamese solution, but it
complicates the handle geometry considerably, and requires a new part
for the top of the saw.
The best solution is
the twisted rope. It’s also the lightest option, which means it’s the
method that causes the smallest momentum effect on the sawing,
especially with the rope all the way at the end of the frame. This is
the method we chose, using heavy, braided fishing line, which is
pretty darn strong. Most saws we looked at had a lot of twine of
varying thickness and as you turned the toggle the toggle got harder
to turn. However on examination we found this is because the toggle
was spending most of it's time twisting the rope, not bending the
frame. We found that only a few loops, about 4 or so, allowed us to
tension the saw very easily without increased difficulty in turning.
The Toggle
Almost all the post-1850 catalogues show a flat paddle intertwined
between ropes that is twisted until it hits the stretcher, and has to
slide between the ropes for clearance to be twisted further. The
problem there is that it becomes harder and harder to slide the toggle
between the twisted ropes as the ropes gain tension. We have seen a
couple of recent solutions to this problem in which the toggle slides
in a nut, which keeps the rope away from the toggle and gives the
toggle a protected place in which to slide. We liked this solution,
but even with the nut in place, the toggle gets harder and harder to
slide up and down as the saw tensions. It wasn’t until we looked more
closely at some 18th century saws that we found an elegant
solution. These saws use a swinging toggle - a turned piece with a
groove at the top to locate the twine. The groove prevents the toggle
from sliding, but its cross section where the ropes cross is thin
enough so that the toggle can swing easily to clear the stretcher.
It’s an ingenious solution, provided the toggle is strong enough to
withstand the compression and twisting. For this, hickory is
particularly well suited, so it was the perfect solution for us.
That all being said
the swinging toggle style is almost too easy to turn. With the sliding
toggles as we said tensioning each turn gets harder. With the swinging
toggle, coupled with only a few loops of rope, rotating doesn't get
harder and even with the saw over tightened it's not hard to
underestimate the amount of tension and easily add in another twist or
two. The downside here is that you can be deceptively lulled unto over
tightening the saw until it fails. We still love this method, but as
people used to sliding toggles it took getting used to.
Summary
So, that’s how we arrived at the numerous features of our saw. If you
want a solid bow saw that captures the best of the early 19th
century tradition, we urge you to consider getting one of our original
Gramercy Tools bow saws. We are pretty proud of our engineering, and
we think it’s great value.
We are also happy to
give you our drawings that reflect all our research and design if
you’d like to make your own saw. We stock kits of blades, brass and
turned parts so all you need to do is the woodworking. Even within the
constraints of good engineering design there is an opportunity to make
a customized saw that has nice aesthetics. Just be careful the wood
you chose is clear, straight-grained and strong enough to take the
tension you need to make the saw work. Remember, the bigger the blade,
the more tension you will need.