I own sixty-eight circular saws, and that’s utter lunacy, part six- The Standard duties

I had mentioned previously that by the 1950's, Porter-Cable had divided their circular saws into three levels of build quality: Standard duty, Heavy duty, and Super duty. This distinction was a sensible one, as the very best of the saws were enormously expensive and designed for extremely hard work, and buying one for home use would be the equivalent of owning a full-sized, four wheel drive diesel pickup truck for commuting to your office job- and who does that?

The Standard/Heavy/Super duty designations were the logical extension of the "ABC" system of dealer levels adopted in the very early '50s: "A" dealers were purveyors of the highest quality equipment only, selling to industry, the "B" dealers provided the middle range products to contractors, and the "C" dealers handled the homeowner quality tools. In practice, a high-end dealer could get you whatever you wanted- the "C" dealers were likely to be hardware stores, selling to the fellow that wanted to cut a board in half before falling asleep in front of the TV, to paraphrase Eddie Izzard.

We've met the Heavy and Super duty saws, but what of the standard duty?

Left to right: 178 c. 1964,125 c. 1957, 66 c.1959

While the terminology was first introduced in 1956, the original standard duty saw of 1954 was the 125, a 6" saw that, in the words of Porter-Cable's ad department, " includes, at a very low price, many features of professional Porter-Cable saws”.

A Volkswagen Rabbit has the same number of tires as a GTO, but that doesn't really make them equal, now does it?

The 125 isn't a bad saw, really. In fact, it's no worse than most homeowner-level offerings of the time. Our lil' pal is entirely made of very light die castings and features ( if that is the right term) a pivoting base made of stamped steel, an integral thumb lever for opening the lower, telescoping guard, and is a very small, nimble wisp of a circular saw ( 8 lbs, which is impressive in a saw that has no plastic parts other than the brush caps). I'm rather fond of the 125, as it lends itself to sawing at shoulder height or overhead, but there is a distinct East German car feel to this tool; everything feels flimsy in comparison to the reassuring mass of a 528 or BK-10. It's important to recall that the A-6, a saw designed specifically for the home hobbyist, required you to visit at least a "B" dealer, making it a heavy-duty in all but name by the standards of the early '50s ( the A-6 was offered for the first few years of 125 production, but was replaced by the less expensive saw by 1957).

By 1956, the 125 gained a sibling in the 160; a saw that is literally a 125 that ate its vegetables. Bearing a 6 1/2" blade and weighing in at a half pound heavier, the 160 is a bit of apple polishing, offering nothing except a slightly deeper cut and an all ball bearing construction, as opposed to the few bushings in the 125; in fact, the only way to distinguish the difference between the saws is the round cartouche on the upper guard- a 125 has a 6, the 160, a 160.

By 1959, someone at Porter-Cable finally noticed they were making the same saw twice, so the 125 was discontinued, and the 66 was introduced, which is even more like the 160 than the 125 was.
This is called marketing, I understand.
The 66 was a 125, bushings and all, that could accept a 6 1/2" blade, it being known for some time that a 6" saw can't always make it through a two-by-four at a 45-degree angle.

There matters would stay until 1961 when the family expanded- there were no less than four models offered by then, including the new 76, which was a 66 that could count higher, our familiar 160, and two 7" saws, the 170 and 177 ( you guessed it, the 170 had bushings, the 177, all bearings). These three new models had wraparound bases which differed in how they were affixed to the body, but the design was essentially still the same configuration introduced by the departed 125.

The last of the saws germain to our conversation appeared in July of 1962. The Porter-cable/Rockwell lineup included the 170 and 177, but new to the family were the 176 and 178, a 6 1/2" and 8 1/4" saw, respectively. The 176 is, in essence, a 66 with the bronze bushings replaced by needle bearings, but the 178, though notable for being the first P.C. saw to offer an onboard blade lock, represents the limits of how big the design could be made without collapsing like a dying star, and most 178's that have seen much use have upper guards that rattle, as the small rivets holding it in place are nowhere near equal to the task. This would not stop Rockwell from developing one last saw of this lineage, the 592, basically a 160 with a thyroid problem swinging a 10 1/4" blade, which is lunacy. I'd love to find one, if any survive, if only to hold it out in front of me like Yorick's skull and ponder the folly of '60's engineers who must have had someone do their physics homework for them.



Almost forgot: the vital statistics are-

125 : 3,300 rpm, 6" blade, 8 lbs
160:3,500 rpm, 6 1/2" blade, 8 1/2 lbs
66:5,000 rpm, idle ( load speed no longer listed by 1959), 6 1/2" blade,8 1/2 lbs
76:4,500 rpm idle, 6 1/2" blade, 9 1/2 lbs
170:4,500 rpmidle, 7" blade, 9 3/4 lbs
177:4,500 rpm idle, 7" blade, 10 lbs
176:4,500 rpm idle,6 1/2" blade, 10 lbs
178:5,800 rpm idle,8 1/4" blade, 12 lbs
592:5,250 rpm idle,10 1/4" blade,18 lbs

All in all, the vast majority of these saws will still cut to a line, even if they don't exactly inspire confidence in the user. They were the last attempt of the company to offer a low budget tool ,s an area where Porter-Cable never quite found its touch, and on that level, they are interesting.

If, you know, you collect saws like a weirdo.
-James Huston