Tale of two felling saws

Post here if you are trying to identify a saw, or want to discuss specific features of saws that can be used for identification.

Tale of two felling saws

Postby bradpj53 » March 25th, 2017, 12:23 pm

I am reconditioning several saw right now (newbie enthusiasm!). One was my grandfather's; I have been toting it around for decades. He used it for firewood making in Wisconsin in the early 1900's. It is a perforated lance tooth design, crescent ground and 66" long. The only identifying mark is a "249" stamped into each end; maybe a company inventory number? The only damage is one cutter tooth snapped off at half-height.

The other I picked up locally here in western NY state at an antique/junk shop; $65 including two usable loop style handles. It is also crescent ground, champion pattern and 66" long. Damage is one raker tip snapped off.

Any ideas of maker on these saws? I'm hoping the limited damage on each one won't be a problem for use; I also picked up a couple of heavily rusted/pitted saws very cheaply for filing practice.

Brad
Attachments
sawcompare.jpg
bradpj53
 
Posts: 5
Joined: March 19th, 2017, 10:57 am

Re: Tale of two felling saws

Postby sumnergeo » March 25th, 2017, 12:44 pm

The upper one looks like a Simonds No. 22; the lower one looks like a Simonds No. 113. There are a number of catalogs included on this site.

The 1909 Simonds catalog has the No. 22 with the identical number of starter teeth on page 38; page H-8 of the 1953 Simonds catalog has the No. 113 and a No. 22 with fewer cutter teeth on the ends.
User avatar
sumnergeo
 
Posts: 264
Joined: February 22nd, 2011, 12:31 pm
Location: Chiricahua Wilderness Area; Houston, Texas; Minneapolis

Re: Tale of two felling saws

Postby Jim_Thode » March 25th, 2017, 8:21 pm

Here is the 1953 catalog: download/file.php?id=10


Looks like they both have sway backs so that eliminates some. The perforated looks like a 133 and the other looks like a 315. The number of starter teeth will vary depending on the length of saw.

Jim
User avatar
Jim_Thode
 
Posts: 666
Joined: June 28th, 2012, 9:34 am
Location: Onalaska, Washington State, USA

Re: Tale of two felling saws

Postby bradpj53 » March 26th, 2017, 6:33 am

Thanks for the replies; as a newbie it's a learning curve to spot criteria for ID. Score one for Jim_Thode and one for sunnergeo; the perforated (Grandpa's saw) is a 133 and the other a 113. The catalog was a great help for using it's tables of specs. Also I see the residue of red paint on one end of the 113, helping to confirm it as a Simonds. Pictured are the snapped raker on the 113 and the snapped cutter on the 113, as well as the residual red on the 113.

Brad
Attachments
brokenraker.jpg
20170325_165711.jpg
20170326_080506.jpg
bradpj53
 
Posts: 5
Joined: March 19th, 2017, 10:57 am

Re: Tale of two felling saws

Postby sumnergeo » March 26th, 2017, 7:19 am

I hadn't noted that the perforated lance tooth had a swayed back so will change my call on a Simonds No. 22 to a No. 133, per Jim's call. The real puzzle could be the number of teeth on the end. Older catalogs show saws with more cutter teeth - 10 - and have that gap separating two teeth from those closest to the end. Seeing the etch might help, the older Simonds had a bigger and fancier S versus those shown in the 1953 catalog.

I'll stick with calling the tuttle tooth a No. 113. It will be easy to tell the difference by looking at the entire saw, a No. 315 would be narrower in the middle than the No. 113, 4 1/2 inches versus 5 1/2 inches. Brad, your photo of the red end will help you find the etch. With the teeth down and the red paint on the right, the etch will be in the middle of the saw (Oops, just re-read your post and see that you already did that).

Just so you know, I use a No. 13 and a No. 113 in our trail work. Both have broken teeth but have managed to cut out hundreds of logs from various locales.
User avatar
sumnergeo
 
Posts: 264
Joined: February 22nd, 2011, 12:31 pm
Location: Chiricahua Wilderness Area; Houston, Texas; Minneapolis

Re: Tale of two felling saws

Postby PATCsawyer » March 26th, 2017, 2:15 pm

I remember that Tuttle tooth saw from its eBay auction which included a pic of the broken raker. The wider belly confirms a #113. Note that the saw was tempered for frozen timber. I have a couple of those saws and they are indeed hard. Better to put a little propane on them if you intend to swage the rakers. John Starling has a nice YT video of forge welding tips on saws with a MIG welder and high speed steel wire. I've been using that technique with success on some damaged saws. Not that hard to do.
User avatar
PATCsawyer
 
Posts: 651
Joined: February 19th, 2011, 5:27 am
Location: Virginia

Re: Tale of two felling saws

Postby bradpj53 » March 26th, 2017, 2:38 pm

Wow, had no idea that was an Ebay saw; picked it up in a local NY antique mart. Good to know re: the hardness.

sumnergeo, the width is a nit under 5-1/2, so 113 it seems to be.

Brad
bradpj53
 
Posts: 5
Joined: March 19th, 2017, 10:57 am

Re: Tale of two felling saws

Postby PATCsawyer » March 26th, 2017, 6:36 pm

On closer inspection, I take back what I said about eBay. I saw the broken raker and it looked just like a crosscut I saw recently on eBay (below). Just one more caution on the tempering of your saw.


Screen Shot 2017-03-26 at 10.30.16 PM.jpg
User avatar
PATCsawyer
 
Posts: 651
Joined: February 19th, 2011, 5:27 am
Location: Virginia


Return to Saw ID

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest