Riddler
ArboristSite Lurker
After lurking for awhile, I figure I ought to dive right in with a couple of questions that have been on my mind for some time. For about a year now, I have been enjoying getting to know a newly acquired country place that has about 20 acres of woodland populated by a mix of redwood, doug fir, oak, pacific madrone and bay trees. The prior owner was a logger by trade, but he did little in the last 20 years of his life to manage the forested areas. Hence, I have a alot of "catch up" to do.
Fortunately, a number of fallen or near fallen trees are not all he left behind. Comfortably sitting in the hay barn are four mid to late 50's Macs, three of which appear complete or virtually complete. The three are a 35, a Super 44 and a 99. They turn over well and demonstrate good compression. I have not gone through them yet with an eye toward trying to start any of them. The unit that is missing a few pieces is a 7-55. There also are half dozen or so longer chain bars (e.g., 30" to 72"). Unfortunately, all but a few have a decent amount of superficial rust on them.
My only chain saw experience to date has been with an easy-to-use, late-model 45cc Homelite with a 20" bar. Hence, the first question that has been on my mind is whether any of the old Macs would be truly useful (and, hopefully, enjoyable to operate) if I invested the time to get them running well. Of the three, the Super 44 looks to have the most useful combination of features. Is the weight to power ratio of this old machine just too out of line to make it a practically useful tool? I am hoping that some folks who have been bitten previously with the restoration "bug" will chime in with some honest advice about what to expect.
The second question is somewhat related to the first. I want to start experimenting with some form of chain saw mill. The Alaskan looks appealing, particularly given it modest cost, but I don't have a running saw at the moment to mate with it. Is the Super 44 (or even the 99) completely out of the question? If so, what would be some cost effective (used perhaps??), yet reasonably effective, machines that I might use with the Alaskan or other portable mill? Also, any advice on what brand and model of mill to seriously consider would be most welcome.
Fortunately, a number of fallen or near fallen trees are not all he left behind. Comfortably sitting in the hay barn are four mid to late 50's Macs, three of which appear complete or virtually complete. The three are a 35, a Super 44 and a 99. They turn over well and demonstrate good compression. I have not gone through them yet with an eye toward trying to start any of them. The unit that is missing a few pieces is a 7-55. There also are half dozen or so longer chain bars (e.g., 30" to 72"). Unfortunately, all but a few have a decent amount of superficial rust on them.
My only chain saw experience to date has been with an easy-to-use, late-model 45cc Homelite with a 20" bar. Hence, the first question that has been on my mind is whether any of the old Macs would be truly useful (and, hopefully, enjoyable to operate) if I invested the time to get them running well. Of the three, the Super 44 looks to have the most useful combination of features. Is the weight to power ratio of this old machine just too out of line to make it a practically useful tool? I am hoping that some folks who have been bitten previously with the restoration "bug" will chime in with some honest advice about what to expect.
The second question is somewhat related to the first. I want to start experimenting with some form of chain saw mill. The Alaskan looks appealing, particularly given it modest cost, but I don't have a running saw at the moment to mate with it. Is the Super 44 (or even the 99) completely out of the question? If so, what would be some cost effective (used perhaps??), yet reasonably effective, machines that I might use with the Alaskan or other portable mill? Also, any advice on what brand and model of mill to seriously consider would be most welcome.