Talk:Japanese saw

Pull-cut explanation

Can someone please succinctly explain why cutting on the pull stroke would inherently allow a saw "to have thinner blades that cut more efficiently and leave a narrower kerf". I understand it intuitively, I think, but a clear explanation in words would help this article, I think. --Ds13 02:34, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Push-saws require a thick blade to remain rigid. Otherwise, the blade would flex wildly as the craftman pushed on the handle, instead of cutting. A pull-saw, on the other hand, is under tension rather than compression during cutting. Therefore there's no stiffness requirement, and the blade can be much thinner. --216.194.55.187 19:00, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

That's a great explanation there now, thanks! Crystal clear. Of course, pull-saws now sound so superior in the article that it begs the question... "What's the downside to a pull-saw?" (The article only really makes the push-saw sound inferior, but I suspect that a well-designed push-saw would allow for more force to be applied to cutting because of the nature of human muscles and a typical cutting stance. Or is it all really downside?) --Ds13 19:00, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I wondered that myself. I've had a miter pull saw and a regular Japanese saw. The miter saw was too weak for the application, and I broke teeth and the cuts would curve within the slot in the miter box. The japanese saw is awesome for it's jobs: neatly trimming, especially if you want to cut a piece of wood flush with the item it sticks out from. But if I were just cutting a piece of 2x4, a push crosscut saw will work faster. I think because you need to push the teeth down against the wood while you make the cutting stroke, and you can do this better pushing than pulling. Also, I think while pushing you can make a fast "punch", while trying to pull (or jerk), your motion is just inherently more gradual. I think that was my problem with the miter saw, it would tend to bend a bit and get bound in the wood on the return stroke, so I'd try to push it roughly through, and teeth would break off. So final tally: japanese pullsaw good, miter-cut pullsaw bad, crosscut push saw faster, but messier. This is all original research, so not suitible for inclusion in the Wiki article. Now if someone were to quote me... Tafinucane 19:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

The fact of the matter is that not all saws are created equal, ds13... hence the rapidly rising popularity of pullsaws in Western woodworking. Like Tafinucane has observed, though, there are different applications to all tools. And Tafinucane: there are official studies that explain results very similar to yours. Perhaps we can find them? Erk|Talk _{-- I like traffic lights --} 06:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Distinctions from western (thick, push-cut) saws

So here's a growing list of distinctions I think would be good and encyclopedic to add to the article, when notable sources can be found for them.

This site[1] may not be notable enough to use as a reference, but mentions:

• a pull stroke does not easily permit putting one's body weight behind a stroke
• thin blades without spine reinforcement (typical of some Japanese saws) may make starting a straight cut more difficult, especially on hardwood
• sawdust ends up on the other side of the wood from you with a push-cut saw
• when played as a musical instrument (important for some), a thick-bladed push-cut saw gives a deeper tone
• pistol-grip handles (not typical on Japanese saws) may be more comfortable for some

Horses for courses, so I'm not suggesting these as advantages or disadvantages, but it would be helpful for a reader coming to this article wondering why or why not to use a Japanese saw. --Ds13 18:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Japanese saw. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204135818/http://www.dougukan.jp/contents/about-tctm_jp.html to http://dougukan.jp/contents/about-tctm_jp.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100224212345/http://www.dougukan.jp/en/ to http://www.dougukan.jp/en/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)