/diy/ - Do It Yourself

Every hand saw I've ever seen has been able to cut on both the push and pull stroke. It just comes down to a question of efficiency in either direction. This guy's just a retard. Not really worth it to teach him, since he'll be dead soon enough.

>>2008650
just show him a screenshot, why write an essay

i think ill print something and show it around in class. lets see how that turn out.

>>2008650
Look closer
Cutting teeth have a clearance angle and rake angle.
They may cut on the backstroke, but with inefficient geometry.

>>2008650
>most commonly used saws are double action
Double action saws are far from common and are largely extinct. Buck saw blades are the only remotely common saw which cuts on both push and pull. In almost all saws the return stroke is used for clearing dust and you need tall teeth with rakers for anything approaching decent performance if the saw cuts on both strokes. Buck saws and other green wood saws can get away with tall and very aggressive teeth since quality of cut does not matter, so they can sacrifice every second or third tooth as a raker and the softness of green wood means those tall aggressive teeth will still have decent life.

You do occasionally see them in cheap saws and they are occasionally attempted to be brought back so manufacturer can exploit the marketing gimmick of "cuts on both strokes so twice as efficient!" but that is only true on very narrow stock since they can not clear the dust and the saw stops cutting and possibly binds on anything much thicker than your thumb.

Rough cut cross cut saws of the european tradition are the one exception, they often use equilateral teeth which do cut on both the push and the pull, but they are not common saws since they leave a very rough cut and tear out badly. These are meant for rough cutting very rough sawn but dried wood to length before surfacing, so the tear out is not an issue. Not many people have use for such saws anymore and wood rough enough to make them useful is not common, even right from the mill since modern mills give a pretty damn good cut.

>>2008688
Will add before some pedantic 4chan autist tries to prove me wrong with examples of saws which cut on both strokes. Yes, there are some specialty saws which do cut both ways, but these are purpose design saws and not common, most people have little use for something like a veneer saw.

>>2008650
So I guess half of all lumberjacks were lazy faggots.

>>2009555
God I wish we still had old growth like that here

>>2008650
>im just home, should i write an essay showing him how many handsaws if not most commonly used saws are double action ? or is that too autistic and boomer might hate me for teaching him ?
Sorry to break it to you, but you are the autist in this case. Most hand saws are made to cut in one direction, just because they can scratch a bit in the other one is kinda like a screwdirver can be used as an extremely crappy chisel. The only bi-directional saw i ever used was w two man saw.

Just attack him with a saw

>>2009555
Those sorts of saws are far from common these days and even when they were in wide use, still only made up a small percentage of hand saws. Buck saws use tooth patterns which descends from these big saws. Saws which cut on both strokes have not been common since people figured out that you need to clear the dust out of the kerf for a good cut, which happened long enough ago that we can not actually say when it happened.

>>2009561
We still have loads of it. Whole massive forests filled.

>>2009594
>We still have loads of it. Whole massive forests filled.
We used to have a whole country full of it

>>2009600
Good ol' times.

>>2009600
Not a whole country, we had plenty of young forests as well. Logging mostly only took the easy to get stuff since they required things like suitable rivers near by to make the big logs transportable. We certainly have less, but we are far from lacking.

>>2008660
Lmao retard why do you like drama? you have nothing to gain from that

>>2009609

>>2009634
And? Not a whole country full. That map is misleading and exploits the lack of understanding people have of terms like old growth, virgin forest and forest ecology as a whole.

>>2009695
What's the difference then chief? Do forests not naturally develop old growth when they aren't under a population that harvests them?

>>2009722
They do and are, many have. The fact you can not see the issues with that map shows how little you understand of forest ecology or current logging practices.

>>2009756
>They do and are, many have
So I'm right?

>>2009777
Only if you remove that single point from the context of everything else you have said so far. In context it is plain wrong and you come off like an idiot.

>>2009798
So you're saying I'm right.

Stop replying you moronic incel.

>>2009804
>I was just trolling all along
Sure. Ok. You showed me.

>>2008650
Do you want to finish the class so you can be gainfully employed? Okay good then shut the fuck up.

>>2009555
They were called bottoms not " lazy faggots"...

>>2009584
And patiently explain, while removing pieces of him WITH an average saw, "See...cuts on both strokes tough guy".

Sounds like a real hill to die on.

>>2009555
I thought 'handsaws' referred to saws that were used with one hand.

>>2009822
Explain the difference to me anon. I have ben patiently waiting.

>>2008650
If your goal is to make the teacher not like you, then by all means proceed. You have nothing to gain by going out of your way to try and prove your teacher wrong, so why bother doing it? If you already know the facts, that's all that really matters.

>>2010016
>I thought 'handsaws' referred to saws that were used with one hand.
... ryoba (and now thanks to you i will have to bleach my keyboard after typing that)

>>2008650
saws only cut on both strokes if the teeth are filed as symmetrical triangle, which there is none on the market

>>2009695
What do you mean? How is it misleading?

>>2010042
Just because you have a single truth in a pile of propaganda does not make it all true. What is so difficult to understand? Get a text book on forest ecology and learn, or better yet, join the field.

>>2010218
https://www.highlandwoodworking.com/continentalframesawroughcrosscutblade.aspx
The common veneer saw tooth pattern is also an example. Few other niche saws use it as well.

>>2010235
That anon posted a virgin forest map in response to talk of old growth and showed he knew little of either.

More so, it is just forest range, area suitable for forest to grow but may not have forest on it, a decent amount would not have. A virgin forest just means it has not been logged, but does not really specify the scale of logging. If we just remove a few trees is it no longer virgin? Where do we draw that line? Virgin forest also includes things most people do not think of as forest and look more like an over grown wooded city lot. Old Growth is a better term and less vague, but the map of such a thing would be less effective at jerking on peoples heart strings. The use of that map was not meant to inform, it was meant to say "I am right" and maybe jerk some people around emotionally.

It is a much more complex thing than many make it out to be. These simplified views were largely used as a way to raise money and awareness but they are starting to cause more bad than good and the people in the big cities are needlessly making life difficult for those that live in and around these forests.

>>2010421
>Few other niche saws use it as well.
ok i lied
continental firewood or greenwood saws used that pattern, i think that ECE blade must be one of the last 3 still in production, since chainsaws obsoleted that

>>2010421
>If we just remove a few trees is it no longer virgin?
Yes, the area directly surrounding those trees is no longer virgin forest.
>More so, it is just forest range, area suitable for forest to grow but may not have forest on it, a decent amount would not have
It literally says "Virgin Forest" not "potentially forested virgin land"

>>2010433
You really know nothing of forest ecology. Nature can remove great portions of forest very quickly and forests die and are replaced by other things and new forests eventually grow. No one surveyed the entire country in 1620, these are just places suitable for forest and had enough forest about to safely mark it on the map without looking like complete morons.

Fairly curious about that void in Alabama/Mississippi, it tugs a distant memory but i can not place it.

>>2010433
>Yes, the area directly surrounding those trees is no longer virgin forest.
Forgot to address this, than there was no virgin forest in 1620. Natives were cutting down trees for centuries before.

>>2010449
I think you might be retarded, anon. The Injuns didn't have the population density needed to deforest that much land. A few trees here and there, sure, but never half the country's worth.

>>2010463
Who said anything about deforestation?

Practically speaking, you are wrong, OP. Apologize to your boomer teacher.

Try to cut something with a pull saw using only push strokes (or vice versa with a western "push" saw) and see how inefficient it would be.

>>2010468
Cutting down a tree is literally an act of deforestation.

>>2010499
Is your life as sad and empty as it seems? I hope not.

>>2010208
You have trouble using them one handed?

>>2010516
Not an argument, fag

>>2010556
So? You have yet to make any arguments or points, just demonstrated ignorance and/or sophistry. Why are you so invested in this? It is hard to believe it is because you care, you would at least know the definitions of common words and phrases if that were the case, but you don't, just seem to be trying to wear me down so you have your hollow victory.

I am happy to go into great deal on this topic, even if I am just being trolled, some anons of worth may get some good information from it, but you need to give me enough to build from that i can offer some useful information besides defining the terms you use but seem not know the definition of.

>>2010579
Still not an argument, nigger

>>2010580
Nor is that. I guess you will get your hollow victory. Now you can go write about it in your diary and masturbate yourself to sleep.

>>2010533
I don't use them at all, but at least in theory you should use them two handed.

>>2011754
In practice and theory they are used both one and two handed. Depends on the cut. Two hands for control and power, one hand for delicacy.

>>2008657
spbp

>>2009594
I still see a ton of them, though normally they're smaller hand versions
Most sort of woods use saw is either something like this that generally has true bidirectional teeth or one of those Silky style curved blade ones which aren't truly symmetrical but still cut 70% as well on the backstroke.

>>2011771
Those silky saws are meant for greenwood, just the Japanese version of a buck saw like your picrel. They have the tooth sharpened to the same angle on both sides, so while you get a cut on both the pull and the push, you drastically reduce the efficiency on the power stroke because of the positive rake angle. Still a minority in the saw world.

The western buck saw tooth patterns are quite a bit different than the silky saw pattern, the rakers on the buck tooth pattern actually make the cut and the teeth just score the fibers. So the teeth are knives which slice a line on either side of the kerf and the raker is a chisel which chisels the wood out from between the two score lines. The triangles are the teeth, the crowns are the rakers.

>>2008650
School isn't about learning what's true, it's about repeating what's "true". Don't waste your time with facts, OP.