Mike Wenzloff and the Remarkable No. 77 Backsaw

[Scoony]

There was someone here years ago that posted threads on saw sharpening. I remember a few of his threads on sharpening the no-set hand saws to include a 77. Don't remember his name.

[adamcherubini]

I have just begun to experiment with this saw, but I have discovered that it does indeed cut the cleanest tenon cheeks I've ever seen. Here is a pic of a quick cut I did for this post. Note this discontinuities are user error and have nothing to do with the saw:

Might not be clear in photo, but to the touch, the cut is amazingly clean.  

So, zero-set saws: lets discuss.

Just a few thoughts from me;
1) I had a discussion with Jane Rees long ago about cross cut filed hand saws. There is no documentary evidence of cross cut filed hand saws from the 18th c. That seemed strange to me, as that century developed hand tool woodworking into an art form. How could they not have had cross cut filed saws? Jane's answer was that she thought saw makers only rough filed their saws with a number of teeth per inch. Once purchased the users would set the teeth, add fleam or whatever they wanted. That makes sense to me. When you rely on saws as they did in real hand tool shops, it would have made sense to optimize your saw for your work, maybe even a specific project. Sharpening saws is like sharpening chisels or planes. It really doesn't make sense to send your tools out to be sharpened in any serious hand tool shop.

2) Saws with little or no set have their place. But they aren't a panacea. Set is only a few thousands of an inch on each side. And I'm not convinced by the claims I've read. Yes, you remove less material with a saw with no set, but you also increase friction in the kerf. And I deeply distrust all reference to saw "tracking".

I recall talking to Mike about this saw. There was a time when saw makers were adding a small amount of fleam to make saws that both ripped and cross cut acceptably. Yes, that can be handy. Don't recall the details of my discussion with Mike, but I think there was a discussion about woodworkers not wanting to pay for rip only and cross cut only saws in every size.

3) 18th c American furniture makers didn't generally build furniture every day. They built a lot of coffins. They made hat boxes, and tent poles, repaired furniture and did some wainscoting and other house joinery. And that was the city guys. They used their saws for a wide range of jobs. I think if you relied on hand saws for 100% of your wood sawing, you'd add set to most or all of them as I have. But I think saw sharpening is as personal and ephemeral as chisel sharpening. One size does not fit all.

[Tony Z]

There was someone here years ago that posted threads on saw sharpening. I remember a few of his threads on sharpening the no-set hand saws to include a 77. Don't remember his name.

Was it Marv W.? I believe Marv helped Wenzloff and was quite good at sharpening. The Wenzloff #16 had the leaf carving done on it by Marv for Mike, and as good as any saw out there.

[Philip1231]

Adam: great historical summary. I have to wonder how much of a demand there was when Disston was manufacturing them? The DisstonianInstitute mentions the advantage of not having to use a shooting plane to clean up the cut. I wonder which woodworkers in particular (or which types of projects) would benefit from such an design? Phil

Just a few thoughts from me;
1) I had a discussion with Jane Rees long ago about cross cut filed hand saws.  There is no documentary evidence of cross cut filed hand saws from the 18th c. That seemed strange to me, as that century developed hand tool woodworking into an art form. How could they not have had cross cut filed saws? Jane's answer was that she thought saw makers only rough filed their saws with a number of teeth per inch.  Once purchased the users would set the teeth, add fleam or whatever they wanted.  That makes sense to me.  When you rely on saws as they did in real hand tool shops, it would have made sense to optimize your saw for your work, maybe even a specific project. Sharpening saws is like sharpening chisels or planes. It really doesn't make sense to send your tools out to be sharpened in any serious hand tool shop.  

2) Saws with little or no set have their place.  But they aren't a panacea. Set is only a few thousands of an inch on each side. And I'm not convinced by the claims I've read. Yes, you remove less material with a saw with no set, but you also increase friction in the kerf. And I deeply distrust all reference to saw "tracking".

I recall talking to Mike about this saw.  There was a time when saw makers were adding a small amount of fleam to make saws that both ripped and cross cut acceptably.  Yes, that can be handy.  Don't recall the details of my discussion with Mike, but I think there was a discussion about woodworkers not wanting to pay for rip only and cross cut only saws in every size.

3) 18th c American furniture makers didn't generally build furniture every day.  They built a lot of coffins. They made hat boxes, and tent poles, repaired furniture and did some wainscoting and other house joinery. And that was the city guys. They used their saws for a wide range of jobs.  I think if you relied on hand saws for 100% of your wood sawing, you'd add set to most or all of them as I have.  But I think saw sharpening is as personal and ephemeral as chisel sharpening. One size does not fit all.

[Nordic]

A Disston 77 saw sharpened for crosscut is done with a 4-1/2" regular taper file with a fleam angle of 45 degrees and no slope / no set.  45 degrees is kind of tough to get the hang of...

Filed for rip, I think they recommended using a "safe-back" file (no teeth on at least one side), again without set.

The taper was why you didn't need set - that and dry, seasoned wood only.  It is a fairly specialized saw, not really one you would think of as all-purpose anyway....

Leif

(edit - I see Enjuneer already answered this.... I should really learn to read more!)

[Nordic]

snip:

There was a time when saw makers were adding a small amount of fleam to make saws that both ripped and cross cut acceptably.  Yes, that can be handy.  Don't recall the details of my discussion with Mike, but I think there was a discussion about woodworkers not wanting to pay for rip only and cross cut only saws in every size.

Mark Harrell (Bad Axe) was doing this with his saws - a modified rip.  He sent me a large backsaw to "review" some time - years? ago...   It cut REALLY nice, and I think that was his reasoning too, IIRC.   I thought it was a bit of a compromise though, as a larger backsaw never really struck me as the best saw for crosscutting, it really is made for tenons.  So he took it back, resharpened it straight rip for me and sent it back for further review.   I ran it through its paces as a rip saw on some tenons, and I did like it better sharpened straight rip.

I still have that saw, he wouldn't take it back...  I don't use it - only because it doesn't feel right to, as I didn't pay for it (and as you can probably guess I have no shortage of saws that I can use
).

.....


To the OP - that's a nice saw, I think those are probably Mike's best achievement.   I did once see (and still may have somewhere) a photo of Mike's "tapering" setup using his Tormek.  It was an interesting approach...   Labor intensive, I would think, but he apparently made it work.  I don't know if that was the method he continued using or not, we were both looking for ways to do it at the same time and shared some knowledge (very little of that commodity came from my side of the conversation).  

I did research ways to do it also, and found it would have taken some doing to set up something more production oriented.  Disston used large stone wheels to taper grind, I recall seeing photos of a pile of them that had been 'used up" that had been disposed of sometime after a factory had closed somewhere, and another not-too-good photo of the process from sometime in the early 20th? century.  I'll have to dig through my archive to see if I can find them...  The issue the Tormek solved was not getting the metal too hot using water to cool as it ground...  Something Disston apparently did as well.

I haven't hear from Mike in many many moons...  or Marv either.  Or Mark.  Or...   Well, I guess that's probably mostly my fault.  

[Admiral]

I haven't hear from Mike in many many moons...  or Marv either.  Or Mark.  Or...   Well, I guess that's probably mostly my fault.  

I've not seen any posts from Marv in some time; he was very generous with his time and expertise and my abilities as a saw filer owes much to his willingness to share, I hope he is ok.

[TraditionalToolworks]

I haven't hear from Mike in many many moons...  or Marv either.

Mike was pretty ill for awhile, I tried to get a hold of him a couple years ago...Marv was also, he did live in Glenhaven, CA in Lake County. I haven't been in contact with either in over 5 years. Marv is about 20 older than me, so he's about 82 now. We all keep getting older...

I see that Lee Valley has taken Mike's saws off their website completely, so suspect that Mike is not making saws anymore.

[Tony Z]

Marv had a very unique carving tool, of his own design, that he used for the leaf carvings. I got close, with a #4 or 5, 3/8" incannel gouge, but never quite as crisp as his.