[Grandstaff] Flexy Scraper and the Saw Vise

[C. in Indy]

I had always liked the Scott Grandstaff articles on www.wkfinetools .  He had more than one story that talked about the adequacy of a draw-filed scraper, skipping the burnisher step.  He said for a high percentage of jobs, that was good enough.   Then one in particular talked about small, flexible scrapers which he filed to a 45-degree bevel.

I decided to do that with some 0.020" saw plate scrap.  Problem was, even on a big scraper my vise was blocking a good 45-degree filing angle.  The solution?  The saw vise!!

[attachment=12622]


This went well, so I took it over to clean up a hatchet handle I was installing (lots of iterations of shaping and fitting).  I wanted a uniform wood preparation, blending my fitting-efforts and taking off the heavy varnish on the store-bought hickory.  It worked fine:

[attachment=12623]

It's now been oiled, and I'm looking forward to using this rescued hatchet:

[attachment=12624]

Happy woodworking!

[andrewb]

I had always liked the Scott Grandstaff articles on www.wkfinetools .  He had more than one story that talked about the adequacy of a draw-filed scraper, skipping the burnisher step.  He said for a high percentage of jobs, that was good enough.   Then one in particular talked about small, flexible scrapers which he filed to a 45-degree bevel.

I decided to do that with some 0.020" saw plate scrap.  Problem was, even on a big scraper my vise was blocking a good 45-degree filing angle.  The solution?  The saw vise!!




This went well, so I took it over to clean up a hatchet handle I was installing (lots of iterations of shaping and fitting).  I wanted a uniform wood preparation, blending my fitting-efforts and taking off the heavy varnish on the store-bought hickory.  It worked fine:



It's now been oiled, and I'm looking forward to using this rescued hatchet:



Happy woodworking!

Ha, timely post.  Have had the interest to try making my own scraper blades from a junk saw for a long time and just finally took the plunge.  Had gotten a junk saw in a box lot a month or so ago and a few days ago finally got around to breaking a few pieces off.  One will be for a Stanley 80 that I needed a blade for.  Was going to also use some of the smaller leftovers for little hand scrapers.  Cleaning up the edges on my list of things to do for the weekend.

[Jim Waldron]

Ha, timely post.  Have had the interest to try making my own scraper blades from a junk saw for a long time and just finally took the plunge.  Had gotten a junk saw in a box lot a month or so ago and a few days ago finally got around to breaking a few pieces off.  One will be for a Stanley 80 that I needed a blade for.  [snip]

I'm not sure you'll be happy with a blade from a saw for a Stanley 80; the normal blade is rather thick, on the order of 1/8 inch or perhaps more. The edge is then indeed sharpened at a 45* angle. A thin saw blade isn't going to be happy adapted to the rather severe duty imposed by the Stanley 80. Worth a try, I suppose, but don't bet the farm on it quite yet.

[Steve Hamlin]

I'm not sure you'll be happy with a blade from a saw for a Stanley 80; the normal blade is rather thick, on the order of 1/8 inch or perhaps more.  The edge is then indeed sharpened at a 45* angle.  A thin saw blade isn't going to be happy adapted to the rather severe duty imposed by the Stanley 80.  Worth a try, I suppose, but don't bet the farm on it quite yet.

Are you sure Jim? Mine is buried away somewhere, but certainly don't remember it having a heavy iron.
Veritas offer a replacement at 0.055" thick, Hock's are reportedly much heavier than original at 0.0625"

[Jim Waldron]

I'm not sure you'll be happy with a blade from a saw for a Stanley 80; the normal blade is rather thick, on the order of 1/8 inch or perhaps more.  The edge is then indeed sharpened at a 45* angle.  A thin saw blade isn't going to be happy adapted to the rather severe duty imposed by the Stanley 80.  Worth a try, I suppose, but don't bet the farm on it quite yet.

Are you sure Jim? Mine is buried away somewhere, but certainly don't remember it having a heavy iron.
Veritas offer a replacement at 0.055" thick, Hock's are reportedly much heavier than original at 0.0625"

Well, You're right, Steve.  I went and measured mine and got 0.09" (probably 3/32" if more precise measurement were available).  Never thought of it as an outlier, but maybe it is.  Still, my thickest hand saw plate measures right at 0.04" and my panel saws are a fat 0.03" thick.

[Steve Hamlin]

Well, You're right, Steve.  I went and measured mine and got 0.09" (probably 3/32" if more precise measurement were available).  Never thought of it as an outlier, but maybe it is.  Still, my thickest hand saw plate measures right at 0.04" and my panel saws are a fat 0.03" thick.

You're right too - that is on the light side then - and I'll not be donating my old cast steel saws for the exercise either.
Since using a thicker iron would preclude using the screw to adjust the bow, would have to tinker with the burr to get the cut just right. Do think heavy is good in a scraper plane with pitch adjustment though.

[bandit571]

Usually, to just clean the store-bought varnish off of a handle,or..to fit a new handle into an older head....just a piece of freshly cut glass works....depending how well you can cut the glass, you can even shape it to match the cut you want....or the molding you need scraped....go to the nearest "Glass Shop", ask for their scraps...usually they give them away...if you are not too much of a pest....

[TraditionalToolworks]

Reminds me, Scott sent me some knives that are somewhere in the garage, to replace the handles on to make some custom dinner knives.

Yet another NorCal galoot! Hooya!

Alan

[bandit571]

Used the saw vise to sharpen a scraper blade this evening...
 
[attachment=12693]
Except this one is for ...
 
[attachment=12694]
Stanley No. 82....Type 1....
Picked the 82 up the other day...for $10...
 
[attachment=12695]
Had to clean a bit of rust off, is all...
[attachment=12696]
That be a Patent Date.....1-29-07