[DocBailey]

Here's a slighter newer version of Smitty's rig-my 1955 Stanley 346

The middle number in the Stanley numbering scheme for these boxes refers to the height of the backsaw (in inches).
The Langdon Acme Millers Falls is also a very nice box. I just sold a very nice example from the '30s. They don't go cheap.

 

[DocBailey]

Smitty - not long after I read your post, I stumbled across this - maybe a start on completing your mitre box-just thought I'd throw it out there
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stanley-Parts-Grab-Bag-61Gauge-40-Level-358-Miter-Box-Stop-Gage-Plane-Screw-/290692633083?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43aea191fb#ht_620wt_1396

 

[DocBailey]

So you snagged that one, huh?-good job!

If you're not already doing so, keep an eye out on your local Craigslist for compatible models. Mitre boxes, while plentiful, are not cheap to ship - but you can often snag a local one cheaply (especially when the saw is long gone) and get the rest of the pieces you need.

 

[DocBailey]

Smitty -
Next time I'm over at location where my 346 is at-I'll get some photos of underside and measurements.

 

[DocBailey]

CL810
Are you saying you don't have any bearings in the uprights? (these would be the bearings upon which the underside of the saw's spine ride).
IF that's what you're after, they are hardened steel wheels, held in place by a screw. Each upright has (2) one fore and one aft. You can see one in this photo.

 

[DocBailey]

CL810 & Smitty
I guess you really do learn something new everyday (if you're paying attention)-I've got more than a couple mitre boxes, but apparently none of my Stanleys are of the vintage you two seem to have. Have a look at the two images below from Stanley catalogs. The first is from 1953 (note feature No 2); now try to find it on the 1934 catalog page.

 

[DocBailey]

A few more observations on bearings (or the lack thereof) ...

We don't know when they first appeared, but it's a cinch the boxes were made for decades without them and worked just fine. In bearing-equipped boxes it appears the main bearing surface bears against the underside of the saw's spine (rather than bearing against the saw plate so as to eliminate/reduce side-to-side movement).
If that's the case, the bearings seem almost superfluous, since when the box is in use, the weight of the saw is borne by the wood being sawed. The uprights serve only to keep the saw perpendicular to the workpiece, and at the correct angle.
One other thought - it may well be possible (and knowing Stanley's penchant for re-using tooling, probable) that if desired, one might be able to swap the saw guide cylinders for later (bearing-equipped) models.

 

[DocBailey]

OK - just for fun, let's see if anyone in the viewing audience knows what this is … (and yeah, we all know it's a miter box)

 

[DocBailey]

Not English. Also not at all sure that paint's original.

 

[DocBailey]

No, not a Langdon product.

Time for a clue: "Justus Traut"

 

[DocBailey]

Apparently the great-grand-daddy of Stanley mitre boxes!

I'm trying to find/beg/borrow a copy of the Chronicle of the Early American Industries Association from March of 2007 (Vol. 60, No. 1) which supposedly has an article on this box. Here's a teaser outtake I found online:
"On June 8, 1875, Justus Traut filed a patent tor an improved miter box, which would launch the Stanley Rule & Level Co. into the miter box manufacturing business for the next one hundred-plus years. Justus Traut was one of Stanley's inventors and contractors. His patent was granted on June 19, 1877 (Figure l). This miter box was designed to be an improvement to miter boxes that were available at the time by other manufacturers. Traut's miter box featured a cast-iron frame and facing board of one-piece construction (Figure L2). This guaranteed that the frame and the facing board would remain perpendicular and square to one another at all times. Most miter boxes of the era …"

I'd love to read the rest …

 

[DocBailey]

Yes, I have, but thanks for posting that link Smitty.

 

[DocBailey]

Yes, but there's no way it's original to the box-It's an 18" Disston No. 4 with a "PHILA" medallion (basically manuf'd in the years between the wars).

 

[DocBailey]

Nothing to be embarassed about-that's a beaut!

 

[DocBailey]

That's an Ulmia, right?-and they don't come cheap. Great color scheme.

 

[DocBailey]

Thanks for the kind words, Gentlemen

I just haven't gotten as far as making the new sacrificial board-but if the lower travel limits are set correctly, the saw teeth can't contact the table

 

[DocBailey]

In the 1950s Stanley catalogs, these boxes (2244, 2246, 2358) are sold alongside the older versions (244, 246, 346, 358, 360).
[see my post #557 (above) for an example of a 360]

Again, for those not aware, the numbering system for Bruce's 2246, for example, indicates (using the last two digits) a 4" depth backsaw, by 26" length.
In the case of my 360, the "6" is the depth of the backsaw; the "0" indicates a 30" saw

The 22xx series is somewhat simplified when compared to the construction of the earlier boxes. They were advertised as having a "minimum number of parts." The 2xx and 3xx series, on the other hand, were advertised as being capable of being made compact for carrying by removing the uprights.
Corresponding models in the 22XX line were actually 2 to 3 dollars more expensive than the 2xx and 3xx series.

 

[DocBailey]

A 50 1/2 was part of the lower priced "Victor" line of tools, and did not come with a saw.

While perfectly serviceable, I believe, given the size of the frame, that it could not handle as big a saw (or by extension, as large stock) as some other models. It also lacked some of the bells and whistles.

Speaking of frames, I can't recall right now, but I think the first number in the 2XX and 3XX series boxes represents the frame number. On some models (again, see my post #557 above) you will see that the front upright can be placed into one of two holes in the swivel arm to accommodate different saw lengths.

 

[DocBailey]

I don't know if I 'd go that far …

To me, personally, the 2XX and 3XX boxes are as good as the Stanleys get.

I'd say that as the Stanleys go, you're better off remembering the few numbers that make up the boxes you're interested in.

 

[DocBailey]

walden's comment reminds me of a few other pointers on saw sharpening specifically for miter saws …

A thorough jointing of the teeth of miter saws before sharpening is of paramount importance, since 1) all the teeth need to do the same amount of work; and 2) the constraints of the box setup mean that only a certain section of the toothed edge will ever be in contact with the workpiece, and will wear more rapidly than other types of saws.

Also, regardless of how you feel about them in general, sloped gullets make a lot of sense in mitre saw sharpening, due to their ability to hold (and dispose of) sawdust.