Review: Silky pocket saw

Joined
Apr 6, 2002
Messages
1,356
Basics

I own several SAKs with small saws and a Corona folding saw with a 10" blade. I was looking for something midway between these products. I didn't know anything about Silky saws, but their pocket saw seemed to have what I was looking for. For $23, there wasn't much risk. This saw comes in 130mm and 170mm versions, with a choice of four different tooth sizes. I bought the 130mm large-tooth blade, since I want it mainly for yardwork and hiking. Here are the dimensions:

Closed size (English) : 6.5" long, 2.2" wide, 1.0" thick through the thickest part of the handle
Opened size (English) : 11.2" long
Blade size (English) : 5.1" long, 1.4" wide, 0.04" thick

Closed size (metric) : 165mm long, 55mm wide, 25mm thick
Opened size (metric) : 285mm long
Blade size (metric) : 130mm long, 35mm wide, 1mm thick

According to the manufacturer, the weight is a little over 7oz. You can see more details at this web site.

Handle

The handle is stainless steel around the pivot and lock area. The steel extends to the rear of the handle, where it is drilled through for a lanyard hole. Behind the lock and pivot, the handle is covered with soft, rubbery grips with a dimpled surface. Because the lower 1/3 of the grips has no steel behind it, the grips can be squeezed all the way together there. Since the handle does not need to be held hard to cut effectively, this does not affect the function of the tool. The grips appear to be held firmly in place on the handle and do not come off with tugging.

The handle felt fine while in use. I wasn't working hard enough to sweat much, but it was very grippy. Some people only like wood or hard nylon on their tools and feel that it is less likely to raise blisters. This saw doesn't require bearing down at all though, so I don't see the handle's grippiness as a problem.

Lock

The lock is similar to a back lock, but with a spring coiled vertically in the handle to provide tension. The blade opens with a small oval thumbhole, then a lock bar snaps into place in either of two notches in the blade. It is unlocked by depressing the large release mechanism behind the pivot. The lock holds the blade very firmly open and is certainly strong enough for any force that would be applied to it while sawing. The only minor concern I have is whether wood chips or other debris might get into the handle and wedge in the spring. I imagine the spring could be flushed out, although it is hard to get at.

Sheath

The sheath is peculiar. It is a transparent plastic pouch with a cover that snaps into place over the top of the tool. It has a metal wire clip on the side that you can slip under a belt or run a belt through. The sheath has a drainage hole in the bottom. I haven't had a chance to carry or use the sheath, so I can only speculate here. I think that slipping the clip under a belt would be OK for around the yard, but not secure enough for hiking. There is too great a chance that it would fall off, especially when I am hiking on steep terrain, climbing over downed logs, etc. I tried it through the belt, and this works fine. The biggest weakness that I can see is the hinge on the cover. A little accidental sideways torque would snap it right off.

Testing

The saw blade is replacable. I like this for a couple of reasons. One is that I can carry a spare blade in case of breakage. The other is that I can pick a blade with the right size teeth for the job. Even though I only have one blade right now, I removed it to see how this was done. It is a very easy job, just remove the large flat head screw and washer. There would be no problems doing this in the field.

I did notice a couple of fit-and-finish things. The washer was warped, and the coating on the screw was very easily marred. I straightened the washer and don't care about the screw. Also, once the blade is in place, the screw can be adjusted for tension. There is little room for adjustment though, and in order to get no vertical play, I had to tighten it all the way down. This makes the blade gritty and tight when opening. None of these things is a big deal for a working tool, but I thought they should be mentioned.

This saw cuts primarily on the pull stroke. It can be opened to two positions - the handle aligned straight with the blade, or the handle elevated about 30 degrees from the blade. I tried both positions, but did most of the work with the former. The 30 degree position might be good if you are standing and cutting on a level surface, since it would keep the saw flush with the surface.

I have a large cottonwood tree in my backyard, and every time there is a hard rain or wind, I collect the windfall for testing knives. These branches were 1" to 2" thick and varied from very green to very dried. I cut these up into 2" long sections. The saw made short work of the cottonwood branches, easily cutting both green and dry wood.

I also cut up a well-seasoned 3" by 3" by 4" triangular split of oak. I also have some birch splits, but I figured oak was a better test. I picked this one specifically because it is larger than I would usually tackle with my SAKs. There was some binding at first as I cut each section, but once I got started, it went right through. I didn't notice any change in sawing effectiveness as I cut the sections off.

Since I have only had this saw for a short time, durability is an unknown.

Summary

Overall, this seems to be a solid tool that I would trust for mid-size sawing jobs. It is a bit heavier than I would like for hiking, but feels very well-balanced when in use. If you like the Japanese-made pull saws, you might want to check these out.

Pictures

Here are some pictures linked in from the manufacturer's web site:

pocketboy130lt.jpg
 
TOB9595, glad it was helpful.

FoxHoleAtheist, thanks for the thread reference. I don't read that forum anymore, so I missed it. That looks like a nice model also. Have you tried your saw on any green wood of 4" - 5" diameter? That's something that I haven't tried yet, since I don't have any lying around. I would be interested to know how that goes. Also, what is the length when closed? It's not listed on the web site.
 
That really is a much nicer looking product than the Felco 60, but in Felco's defense I think the #60 I reviewed has been revamped. Silky saws have a solid reputation in general, I have no doubt you enjoyed cutting with that one. They in general almost have you looking for wood to cut up they work so well.

As for large wood, if the wood is actually of significant size compared to the blade, the efficiency goes way down as basically only part of the blade is cutting the wood (just consider how much of the wood each inch or so of the blade actually sees on a draw).

When I compared the hatchet to the Felco on larger wood, 6"+, it was *really* time consuming on the saw as only the last inch was getting a full pull, the rest was only partly cutting the wood, it was like trying to cut with a 3" saw, a lot of strokes with little cut on each pass. I have a larger (12") pruner that works much better for such wood. It can cut alongside a swede saw (Trailblazer) without giving up too much time.

-Cliff
 
Tarsier, the closed length is 8 13/16" The largest thing I've cut with it is the 3" diameter tree in the back (just went out and measured the stump... my wife thinks I'm a weirdo now). I've been thinking that the Topgun 240LT (http://www.silkysaws.com/topgun240lt.htm) would make a good-sized saw for backpacking/camping. The blade is long enough at 9.45" to work on larger pieces if need be, yet it's still light and compact, not to mention high-visibility yellow.

On a side note, I know it's best to be prepared for anything, but what's the largest size chunk-o-wood you would normally need to cut up in a "survival" scenario? (i.e. shelter-building, etc)
 
Cliff Stamp said:
As for large wood, if the wood is actually of significant size compared to the blade, the efficiency goes way down as basically only part of the blade is cutting the wood (just consider how much of the wood each inch or so of the blade actually sees on a draw).
I've noticed that too. Any thoughts on a "rule of thumb" for blade-to-material ratio beyond which efficiency goes down, like maybe 2:1? That would match your results pretty well.


FoxHoleAtheist said:
On a side note, I know it's best to be prepared for anything, but what's the largest size chunk-o-wood you would normally need to cut up in a "survival" scenario?
The reason that I asked about larger diameter wood was just academic curiousity, not a survival scenario. I wondered if you had reached any limits of your saw in testing, as that is good information to know. By the way, you should tell your wife that at least your hobby is constructive and helpful to other people, even if it is kinda odd...:D
 
As a general rule of thumb, what ever length of saw is inside the wood, only half of that cuts the full length of wood.

Thus if you take a six inch saw and cut a one inch piece of wood, you have a 5+1/2 = 5.5" saw

But the same saw on a three inch piece of wood is 3 + 3/2 = 4.5" saw

On a 5 inch piece of wood it is 1+5/2 = 3.5" saw and you now really feel it struggling.

In general effective blade length is (BL-WL)+WL/2, where BL is the blade length and WL the wood width.

It gets worse as well due to the pressure difference, exerting the same force on a six inch piece of wood has only 1/6 the pressure of a one inch piece of wood which means you have to press six times harder to get the teeth to bite in as deep.

Thus on larger wood you get performance loss from two directions, which means in general you want larger teeth to combate the pressure loss (less teeth fewer contact points and thus more pressure per applied force) and a longer blade to reduce the effective blade loss.

For example in the above if the saw had a 12 inch blade on six inches of wood the effective saw length is :

6+6/2 = 9 , or 75% of optimal, however the six inch blades is 50% of optimal on the same wood, so the longer the blade, the less of a reducion you see on bigger wood.

On a really large blade, like a full length swede saw (36" blade) you have

30+6/2 = 33, or 92% of optimal, you don't even notice a difference.

-Cliff
 
Back
Top