Disston 3D Saw Vise

[JIMB49]

When I used the disston, I'd line the jaws with a few layers of blue painter's tape, which worked for me.

I Have a Wentworth I have lined the jaws with the stick on cork the thin stuff for the coasters cuts down on the chatter.
My big hassle is finding good  files, any more the ones I do find are JUNK

[bandit571]

I do not line the jaws..however IF you want...use a length of Rubber Air Hose...Make a slit, and slide the hose on to the jaws...

However...THIS came home today...for a $5 bill..

   
Garage sale item

   
No. 3 Saw Vise..

   
Needs a bit of clean up, everything works..could do with a drop of oil...

[TraditionalToolworks]

Now, if you had a pair of Starrett 85A or 85C dividers lying around, not being useful...then we should talk.

I was thinking about this and although the Starrett 85C is a cool looking tools, it is really not needed. I like the smaller 4" dividers to measure off my dovetails, those short ones are harder to find when I was looking for them. But I could use a cheap pair of General calipers, made in Taiwan or China, I got them in a Kennedy toolbox I bought filled with machinist tools.

But it really reminded me how woodworkers fret over using machinist quality tools to accomplish something a nail, string and a pencil could solve.

I have to wonder if I need a set of 12" dividers that are so accurate? I think I could draw a perfect circle by using a nail with a string and a pencil. I know, not as elegant and I am being a hypocrite as I do have one.

Sometimes I'm guilty of using a digital caliper, but more often than not for my woodworking I use older vernier calipers or a couple manual ones I have. They are plenty accurate enough, even locking the jaws with a thumbscrew.

I've seen a video, could be on the web, of Frank Klaus explaining how to use a story stick. It's possible to build fine furniture without using a ruler. And if I'm not mistaken Klaus had a method for cutting dovetails on the fly as well, without using measuring tools, just wing it on the pins and stand it on end to mark the tails. I have practiced that out and it works well, but I prefer to cut the tails first.in the style that Cosman teaches.

Let me ask you this Bill. In thinking about this I may have used a thin pencil, I can't remember. I will digging through the garage or my hand tool shop this weekend to see if I can find them. I will look around for the 85E calipers I own. I see the A is 7", the B is 9", C is 7" with extension legs, D is 9" with the extension legs, and E is 12", and F is 12" with extension legs.

You were asking for 6" with or without extension legs I guess, what I have is a 12" without the legs. It has the divider legs.

I'll let you know if I find them, and curious what you'll offer in trade for a $237 list price tool! Seriously, are you interested in trading something for them? I'd part with them, I'll just use a nail, string and a pencil if I need to draw/cut circles in wood.


For any folks out there buying used woodworking tools, thank your lucky stars, cause machinists tools are a magnitude more expensive...machinist tools are expensive for the good ones. Lots of cheap imports, but those are not Starrett. I'd trade for other Starrett tools though, you probably have a few already?

[Bill_Houghton]

Thanks.  I have the big ones, inherited from my uncle; and the small ones would be a luxury acquisition.  I'll keep hoping to stumble over some of the little ones at an estate sale.

I like the 85 series dividers because you can set them to dead rigid.  Most spring dividers (a spring pushes them open), including wing dividers with a spring for fine adjustment, can be pushed smaller inadvertently.  The 85 series dividers, while they have a spring for fine adjustment, also have two opposing knurled nuts to lock them into the setting you want.

And, yes, I agree that even dividers themselves can be a luxury item, and that cheap ones can work just fine. But it's nice to have quality tools.

Back to saw vises, although not the Disston 3D: some vise makers mounted the vise on its base by way of a ball mount, similar to the ball mount carving vises (and the creative ball mount carving tables made using a bowling ball). This allows the normal toward you/away from you tilting, and it also allows side-to-side tilting. I can understand the toward/away tilt, but what's the benefit of side-to-side tilting?

[TraditionalToolworks]

And, yes, I agree that even dividers themselves can be a luxury item, and that cheap ones can work just fine.  But it's nice to have quality tools.

I would never be one to dis quality tools of any type, I have a number of them sitting around that were made custom for me that I haven't used too much, but I just like using quality tools. That was my whole premise on making my own backsaws out of bronze. It's hard to justify the cost of bronze over brass, both look beautiful when finished, just that there are qualities about bronze that I love over brass. Even the 85E I have, and it is a big monster! I'm gonna keep my eyes open for those caliper legs and/or see how much Starrett sells them for, that would be handy to have a the ability to measure large pieces I'm working on, with metal For wood, I would probably use them when needed.

Back to saw vises, although not the Disston 3D: some vise makers mounted the vise on its base by way of a ball mount, similar to the ball mount carving vises (and the creative ball mount carving tables made using a bowling ball).  This allows the normal toward you/away from you tilting, and it also allows side-to-side tilting.  I can understand the toward/away tilt, but what's the benefit of side-to-side tilting?

There have been dozens of welding tables made out of a bowling ball swivel mount. Yes, it is convenient. I have a pattern maker's vise that I use as my tail vise with bench dogs, and I use it for handle carving, have even used it as a stitching horse with leather. The smaller imports are actually the preferred size, IMO. I have one for my next bench for my new shop.

I'm heading up to Concord to pick up the Acme. I still feel a bit bad, as Pedder was the one asking, but sometimes location is everything and having the cash in hand and willingness to part with it...old rust is a funny thing...I have been entirely satisfied with the 3D vises I use, I have found them about the best of the vintage styles, but I have always been looking for the unobtainable Acme like many people...I even offered this 3D to Pedder as a kinda consolation prize...it reminds me of the Rolling Stones who I grew up with...

I was like rolling into the Summer of Love...I leave this thought with Pedder...you gotta crank it up...just like the Summer of Love, we let our voices be heard in Cali!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ef9QnZVpVd8

In my case I get what I want today...

[TraditionalToolworks]

Hopefully a happy new home for this 3D vise, Arlin is going to be the next caretaker.

[Bill_Houghton]

Incidentally, Disston seems to have called these "D-3" vises, at least in 1932, as evidenced by this catalog page from that year (thoughtfully posted by someone on an Australian forum):

   
I will grant that it is (also) a 3D vise, if by that you mean "three, not two or, say, 12, dimensional;" but that's a feature it shares with lots of vises.

For no good reason except drooling purposes, an adjacent page:

   

[Timberwolf]

Incidentally, Disston seems to have called these "D-3" vises, at least in 1932, as evidenced by this catalog page from that year (thoughtfully posted by someone on an Australian forum):

I will grant that it is (also) a 3D vise, if by that you mean "three, not two or, say, 12, dimensional;" but that's a feature it shares with lots of vises.

For no good reason except drooling purposes, an adjacent page:

.............
I have the D-2 with filing guide and the D-3 without...The D-2 with guide is rather scarce...I don't recall ever seeing another one, but I'm pretty sure they made lots of them.

[bandit571]

So...when did it change from either No. 3 to D-3.....or was it the other way around?

[Bill_Houghton]

It looks to me, from those two catalog pages, like the "D" designation was included when the vise had that gizmotic filing guide attached.  Note that there's a No. 2 vise, and a D-2 vise, the big difference between them being the presence of the filing guide.  But Disston decided not to issue (at least not in that year) a plain No. 3 vise, or a fancy "D-1" vise. Perhaps there was, at one time, a plain Jane No. 3 vise.

I'll have to look at mine, next time I'm in that part of the storage shed, and see if there's evidence that it had a filing guide at one time.

Who can explain these things now, 90 years later?  But surely it made sense to the marketing aces at the time.