# Notch cut order?



## JimL (Jan 7, 2006)

Ive always cut the flat part of my notch before cutting the angled part of the notch. Ive been working around some guys that do it the opposite and cut the angle first then the the flat part of it. 

Just curious of how you guys cut it?


----------



## begleytree (Jan 7, 2006)

flat, down, back
-Ralph


----------



## Freakingstang (Jan 7, 2006)

begleytree said:


> flat, down, back
> -Ralph




x2


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jan 7, 2006)

I do the flat, down, back, but it's smarter to do it the other way because you don't end up like Treeco, recutting to make things meet. Once the down cut is made, it's simple to meet up with the flat.
The obvious downside is accuracy.
Where the hell is the F-ing spell checker??????


----------



## StIhL MaGnUm (Jan 8, 2006)

I cut using a open face notch , cut down angle first then upward bottom cut then back cut . If any of you have gone to logger training classes or felling classes they will always tell you to make your downward cut first , also to use the open face notch as it is the safest of all the notches due to the tree staying attached to the stump until it hits the ground so you can control your fall better .

Rob


----------



## smokechase II (Jan 8, 2006)

JimL:
Be aware that not all trees will stay attached till they hit the ground, even with an open face. An early break can be sponsored by dropping dead, low moisture content timber (in drought conditions) and some species are just more brittle and will break earlier.
Also, the ability of an open face to better control most solid green trees is generally overstated. Trees with substantial height, weight or size are almost impossible to change their direction of fall after they have committed through a 45 degree angle. 
Yes, holding wood (the hinge) is generally the most powerful controller of a trees fall. But don't expect too much here on anything but small timber. Holding wood achieves its success in the first half of a trees' drop.
A conventional face is the easiest to make.
Then a humboldt.
Then an open face.
On the more dangerous trees, please consider the amount of time in the danger zone (next to the base of the tree). 
The conventional face also usually makes for the shortest stump. If that is important. Caveat: On the danger thing; the lower the wood on a tree, the wider and denser it will be. Again, more time in the danger zone. Safety may dictate that you cut at a standing - escape friendly height - then trim the stump after the tree is down.

Also, when you're sighting (gunning) after you've put in or started your face. For greatest accuracy don't look from above. Look from behind the saw and remember that sights show the powerheads direction, not the precise tree lay.


----------



## JimL (Jan 8, 2006)

I use a conventional notch 99% of the time, when im in a hurry cuttin small 6" and under treesi use a humboldt just cause its quicker to cut.


----------



## Tree Sling'r (Jan 8, 2006)

JimL said:


> I use a conventional notch 99% of the time, when im in a hurry cuttin small 6" and under treesi use a humboldt just cause its quicker to cut.



Conventional all the time, with the exception of just sniping stuff out of the way. There is definatly a difference between east coast vs. west coast methods. There is no best way - it's what works for you - for us over here though the lower the stump the more money - mills frown on Humbolt Cuts - too much scale wasted.


----------



## notahacker (Jan 8, 2006)

I took a felling class put on by Husqvarna. The instructor was Ron Hartill, you may have heard of him. If not, he was a 7 time World Champion Lumberjack back in the 70's. He know his logging and felling. 

The popular way to fell a tree is flat, down, back. And that is the way I was first taught, until Ron pointed out some good things about Down, Flat, and then Back. 

Ever since then I have always (when using a TRADITIONAL notch) put in my 45 degree cut in first. Then lay my saw in and do the flat cut. The point of this is to be able to glance inside of that 45 cut to see your cuts match up perfectly. That way you don't mess up your notch. I watch others use the popular way to do this and see them cut, re-cut, and then stop to re-cut again.

I can see that when using a HUMBOLT notch it is best to start with the flat cut first. Perhaps some are getting these two confused?

At first I was hesitant and not so well with this method, however, I bacame well with this. My cuts match up all of the time and my notches are beautiful, thanks to Ron.

See attachment of the beautiful hinge wood from a Siberian Elm


----------



## Newfie (Jan 8, 2006)

Always the top angled cut and then the bottom cut, whether it be for a coventional or open face notch.


----------



## notahacker (Jan 8, 2006)

In the urban environment with it's fences, houses, gardens, cars, dog houses, doll houses, bird baths, Koi fish ponds, septic tanks, concrete driveways, brick, flagstone paths....

I think there is a "best way" for each circumstance. 

In addition, when it comes down to felling a 5' diameter tree with a height of 90 feet with a crown of 60 feet. Your accuracy is all that matters. That is the largest tree I have fallen. My customer and neighbors appreciated my practice after that.


----------



## JimL (Jan 8, 2006)

I get my notch cuts to line up probably 85% of the time, some times I need to go a little deeper with my flat cut, I might try making my 45 degree cut first and see how that goes..


----------



## daveyclimber (Jan 8, 2006)

Most cuts I see here in Nor-Cal are humbolt cuts , I have yet to see a stump in the woods with a conventional stump


----------



## smokechase II (Jan 8, 2006)

notacher:
Your elm stump is post card material. 
On the bigger tree, can't see the face.
For the most part, I don't really see a difference in which of the cuts of the face come first.
Which type of face, yes that can be important.
One down side to doing the upper (45 degree) portion of a conventional face first on bigger trees is that when you do the lower cut second, the undercut will set down on your saw. With trees about up to 16" or so in diameter, that is OK as the saw should have the power to flip the undercut away (if you're back barring) or at least hopefully have the power to finish.
However, with larger timber, you might have to put in a wedge on the horizontal (2nd) cut to keep from pinching as you match up.
With a steeper humboldt bottom, this is not usually too big a deal as the face wants to fall away and less force is transmitted to this pinching.
Small potatoes stuff. Wouldn't get anybody’s attention in Idaho.


----------



## smokechase II (Jan 8, 2006)

daveyclimber:
Most loggers on the West Coast use humboldts almost all of the time.
Contrary to popular belief, it doesn't always get the most fiber to the mill.
But it does get a squared off bottom log that is easy to work with at the head rig.
Humboldts have several other advantages. One of which is that if you've got a tree that the butt 'could' kick back, a humboldt is by far the best at possibly stopping the tree from coming back over the stump. This is difficult to guarantee and if a butt log coming back is possible, better have a right angle escape set up before hand.


----------



## Tree Sling'r (Jan 8, 2006)

Tree Sling'r said:


> Conventional all the time, with the exception of just sniping stuff out of the way. There is definatly a difference between east coast vs. west coast methods. There is no best way - it's what works for you - for us over here though the lower the stump the more money - mills frown on Humboldt Cuts - too much scale wasted.



Oops, I totally confused my terms. Humboldt all the time. What I meant state: I cut Humboldt all the time, the mills frown on Convention - too much scale wasted. Now that I feel really stupid - I will say again I do this for a living.


----------



## tawilson (Jan 9, 2006)

When you say you feel stupid, you should mispell something. The humor takes some of the sting away. And not being a professional, changing to angle cut first helped me to hit my notch cuts.


----------



## fishhuntcutwood (Jan 9, 2006)

Tree Sling'r said:


> Oops, I totally confused my terms. Humboldt all the time. What I meant state: I cut Humboldt all the time, the mills frown on Convention - too much scale wasted. Now that I feel really stupid - I will say again I do this for a living.



I knew what you meant.  

Jeff


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jan 9, 2006)

Conventional Notch: i like the peekaboo thru the upper 45, but especially in a large face don't like the final cut being the lower/horizontal/floor; for then the pieslice/wheel chock is large and ends up on top of the saw at seperation. So, i don't mind starting the slant, going for the bottom cut, then finishing the slanted cut to meet "squware"

i think the chances of BarberChair are far greater for cutting the bottom/floor cut too far, than for cutting the upper/slanted cut too far. The kerf close of a bottom/floor cut too far closes earlier i think, at point of less lean; and then pushes up the linear column of most resistance; at that earlier close/lean. The kerf close of an overcut /downward cut, doesn't close until the fiber peels from the backing fiber; then the close happens agianst the forward floor pushes across the fibers column, flexxing the fibers(not up the fiber column but across it). This is what the push of the floor of the facecut does to the fiber hinge anyway in a 'proper' hinge; and this push is perhaps just delayed here. The upward push (of an overcut bottom/floor cut)happens normally too; but; usually at close after the column/spar is farther forward, so it isn't actually pushing up the column, but again across it.

The bottom/floor overcut closes earlier, and pushes up the column/spar, when said spar is still more vertical than horizontal. i think this incidence of pushing up a still vertical spar gives the dreaded siezing that gives a battle between the massive leverage of the tree lunging forward and the push back of the face, violating the integrity of the spar to a split decision of BarberChair/ of neither forward or backward force totally winning. Pushes perpendicular/across fiber column is a leveraged flexxing of the spar as a device; pushes up the column does not give leverged flex/is inline resistance(up not across spar); not flexxing the column; giving 'dead' stop.

Orrrrrrrrrrrr something like that!
:taped:


----------

