Making a Byrnes style Bench Saw

[johnv]

A friend showed me his Byrnes table saw, and I was immediately impressed by its size, weight, quality design and construction.
I like to make tools and machinery, and since I could find no examples for sale, decided to make one along similar lines to be used in future model ship building.
My friend extolled the virtues of the saw, but he had 2 criticisms. The motor was underpowered, and the table was too short. I watched Olha Batchvarov's video assessing the saw and could see that the table is indeed too short, with the sliding attachment almost falling off at the end of cutting strokes. So I made my table 100mm longer, at 400mm.
Also, I am using a 750w speed controlled AC Servo motor, which is small enough to fit inside the box/carcass. That is a considerable increase from the Byrnes 200w motor. It also has automatic braking and soft start. And matches the motors which I have used for my drum sander and disk sander.
I started by drawing up the intended construction on AutoCAD (2D) and SolidWorks (3D) see photos. Some aspects were revised as construction proceeded.
And now I well into the construction. I am an amateur metalworker, but have accumulated various skills in the past 2 decades, including lathe work, mill work, CNC machining, silver soldering, welding, metal casting etc. My icon shows a cannon which I made, along with several others in recent years.
My design is strongly influenced by the Byrnes table saw, but is not a copy, and I trust that no intellectual or legal rights have been infringed. It is for my personal use, and I do not intend to make more than one. However, if there is interest I will make my design, plans, specifications available.
The case and table top are made from 12mm aluminium. The main shaft arms are from 16mm alu.
The 3rd photo is a genuine Byrnes.
This project is paused, while waiting for parts to arrive from OS.

 

[Bryian]

wow, thats nice work.

 

[DAWarden-(Jaager)]

Congratulations on solving the small tablesaw availability problem.

Just a comment on the two criticisms of the Jim saw:
If by too short, you mean not wide enough, there is an upgrade to an 18" wide table. It allows the fence to remain when the sliding table is in use.

The power provided by the motor, I just take a situation where that occurs as meaning that I am asking the Jim saw to do a job better and more safely done by a larger and more often different type machine.
I think that the best use for the saw is with relatively thin stock and slicing off scale boards, keels, beams.
Using it as part of a sawmill operation to get large billets to at least be one dimension in scale is pushing it.
It is probably an exercise in futility or frustration or just dealing with a complaining machine to ask a 4" tablesaw to save having to have the use of a full size bandsaw, 10" tablesaw, thickness sander.

My most challenging factor with the saw is matching the job with an efficient blade for it. The number of sources for 3" and 4" blades is decreasing also.

 

[Y.T.]

Byrnes table saw limits are not its length but the sturdiness of the blade which gets better as kerf (thickness) and diameter of blades increases. Blade must be sturdy on the shaft to make consistent wood cuts. Larger blade diameter calls for more powerful motor and so on. Just buy a 8" or 10" blade diameter commercially available table saw for quarter price and enjoy.

Byrnes saw is not for 2" x 4" lumber. It is for slicing tiny thickness wood sheets not thicker that 4 to 5 mm high.

 

[johnv]

Congratulations on solving the small tablesaw availability problem.

Just a comment on the two criticisms of the Jim saw:
If by too short, you mean not wide enough, there is an upgrade to an 18" wide table. It allows the fence to remain when the sliding table is in use.

The power provided by the motor, I just take a situation where that occurs as meaning that I am asking the Jim saw to do a job better and more safely done by a larger and more often different type machine.
I think that the best use for the saw is with relatively thin stock and slicing off scale boards, keels, beams.
Using it as part of a sawmill operation to get large billets to at least be one dimension in scale is pushing it.
It is probably an exercise in futility or frustration or just dealing with a complaining machine to ask a 4" tablesaw to save having to have the use of a full size bandsaw, 10" tablesaw, thickness sander.

My most challenging factor with the saw is matching the job with an efficient blade for it. The number of sources for 3" and 4" blades is decreasing also.

Thanks for the congrats!

The criticism from the Byrnes saw owner was that there is not enough table behind the blade, not with the width. And watching the Batchvarov video I could see that the sliding work table tended to overbalance at the completion of a cutting pass. I expect that the extra 100mm behind the blade will avoid that tendency. The extra space in the saw carcass allows the motor to be situated inside the carcass, which I think is also an advantage.
Re power. I am sure that 200w is plenty for cross cutting model ship planks etc, but ripping will be easier with more power. And I expect that my saw will be used for thicker material as well, not just model ship building.
But I guess that we will see. I will show further progress in this thread, and a final report when all is finished.

Byrnes table saw limits are not its length but the sturdiness of the blade which gets better as kerf (thickness) and diameter of blades increases. Blade must be sturdy on the shaft to make consistent wood cuts. Larger blade diameter calls for more powerful motor and so on. Just buy a 8" or 10" blade diameter commercially available table saw for quarter price and enjoy.

Byrnes saw is not for 2" x 4" lumber. It is for slicing tiny thickness wood sheets not thicker that 4 to 5 mm high.

I have designed for timber up to 25mm thick, using a blade of 100 to 110mm diameter.
I have a 3hp table saw already for anything bigger than that.

 

[Ridley]

Thanks for the congrats!

The criticism from the Byrnes saw owner was that there is not enough table behind the blade, not with the width. And watching the Batchvarov video I could see that the sliding work table tended to overbalance at the completion of a cutting pass. I expect that the extra 100mm behind the blade will avoid that tendency. The extra space in the saw carcass allows the motor to be situated inside the carcass, which I think is also an advantage.
Re power. I am sure that 200w is plenty for cross cutting model ship planks etc, but ripping will be easier with more power. And I expect that my saw will be used for thicker material as well, not just model ship building.
But I guess that we will see. I will show further progress in this thread, and a final report when all is finished.

I have designed for timber up to 25mm thick, using a blade of 100 to 110mm diameter.
I have a 3hp table saw already for anything bigger than that.

It’s fascinating to see this version of the Byrnes table saw brought to life. The original design was clearly a masterclass in intelligent compromise — built with lighter gauge materials and a modest motor so it could be manufactured economically and made accessible to a wide range of modelers. That balance between performance and cost is no small achievement.


What makes this new build so impressive is that it isn’t constrained by those same production realities. By stepping up to heavier aluminum plate and a more powerful motor, you’ve explored what the design can become when durability and performance are allowed to lead the conversation. The added mass alone should translate into excellent stability and smoother operation.


Just as noteworthy is the way you’ve listened carefully to users of the original saw. Rather than simply copying a respected tool, you’ve thoughtfully addressed the small frustrations and limitations people experienced, and refined them in your build. That kind of iterative improvement shows real respect for both the original design and the modeling community.


Your strengths as a draughtsman and machinist are evident throughout. The precision, proportion, and finish reflect not only technical skill, but careful planning and execution. It’s one thing to admire a design — it’s another to reinterpret it with this level of craftsmanship and insight.


This isn’t just a remake; it’s a considered and beautifully executed evolution.

Regards. Ridley.

 

[johnv]

Some more progress on the saw.
Curved slots were CNC milled into the case for the main shaft and the blade height lock.
The main shaft itself was finished by lathe cutting a 12mm x 1.25mm thread, silver soldering the blade backing plate to the shaft, making and fitting the blade washer, then fitting the shaft assembly to the large height adjusting hinge assembly.

The curved slots milled into the box sides. The blade height lock hex screw will be replaced with a brass knurled knob.


Silver soldering the blade backing plate to the main shaft, taking care to not distort the lathe cut thread. The plate was finished in the lathe after the steel had cooled.



The main shaft installed, ready for the blade. The blade will cut its own slot into the top plate (underneath in this photo) after the height adjusting mechanism is in place. The brass collars prevent the main shaft from moving laterally. At this time the bearings are just pressed into the arms. If there is any tendency for them to move I will convert the arm ends to clamps.

I do realize that this level of metal machining is not for most model ship builders, but I am documenting the process here for interest, and maybe to stimulate similar activities in others.

Next I will install the blade height adjusting mechanism.

 

[Tony P]

Great stuff

 

[johnv]

Great stuff

"Failed Le Rochefort". Now that is a brutally honest self assessment. I take my hat off to you, Sir. I should add a few of those to my list. John.

 

[Tony P]

"Failed Le Rochefort". Now that is a brutally honest self assessment. I take my hat off to you, Sir. I should add a few of those to my list. John.

Have to call it what it is ! Be humble enough to accept failures.