Alaskan mill

[Leeroy]

I square file, and usually run a chain on my work saw slowly filing it back to ten degrees or less.
Then it's ready to mill with.

 

[BobL]

Are you using it as is, or filing it back to 5 or 10 degrees first? I'm thinking that I may start getting cross cut chains and turning them into ripping chains. There's just too little variety offered in stock ripping chains. I will at some point file that ruined chain back to where the rakers aren't too hopelessly low but it will require taking an enormous amount off of each tooth to do so because of just how far I took down the rakers. Will have to use an electric chainsaw grinder sharpener rather than a file. It's not a big priority though because it was for my 36" Duromatic .404 hardnose and I don't plan to use that much more for milling and am going to get a .404 42" roller tip bar for my MS880.

George, if you measure the raker angle as shown here by the red line below it's pretty easy to work out how much you need to file the cutters back by.
I measure the raker angle using a Digital Angle Finder (DAF) but you can just measure the gullet width (digital callipers) and the raker depth (feeler gauges) and calculate the angle and amount needed to file of teh cutters from there.
If you don't know how to do it then post either the angle, or the gullet width and raker depth.
It may not take much off teh cutters to bring the chain back into something useful.




BTW I usually buy full comp 30º chain and file it back to 10º over successive sharpenings.

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

Thanks, Bob, the more I read of what milling veterans are doing, the more I'm seeing it's pretty standard for people to buy regular chain and file back the angle with each sharpening. I just got back from a trip to Mexico where I repatriated a variety of my things I had from living and milling down there, and got my digital calipers back and am sure have feeler gauges around somewhere so should be able to do this right. After some initial enthusiasm about milling with my newly fixed 045 Super, I'm less enamored of it or the 056 Super now because the tension pin wants to pop out from the bar on them, loosening the chain, plus the tension screw is near impossible to get at while the head is mounted on the mill. And they're just plain ancient and not as reliable starting all the time as the 880. (I replaced one of the tension screw and pin assemblies, not sure why they have so much play.) Going to focus on getting the bars and chains I want to keep the 880 as the main milling machine in all but the small logs. One of the posts I read you would use an 8 pin up to 30 inch cuts in Aussie hardwood, and then the stock 7 pin above that. Since nearly everything I'm doing is hardwood in the 15-28" range at the moment, seems like I may want to get an 8 pin for most of my work.

 

[James Sawyer]

Depends on a few things to actual slabbing width - I've found that my Stihl Duromatic 36" and my GB 72" bar are that length from tip to halfway between the mounting studs, not actually that cutting length from tip of powerhead to tip of bar. Then of course you have to take the spikes off if you want max width, which is a slight bother if you plan on switching it back and forth between use as a felling saw and milling saw. But yeah, give yourself about 5 to 8" more bar width than width of slab you expect to get most of the time, depending on the setup. I swapped a 42" steel Alaskan mill for a 36" Granberg Alaskan mill to give myself flexibility of extending the rails on it and went ahead and bought a 60" set of rails from Granberg for my 72" GB bar. Haven't had cause to use the setup as I'm mostly milling mesquite that has run 28" at max so far so my 36" bar/mill does fine for most of my work and isn't too cumbersome. Running an 880 head so I have no worries on power on any bar. Just rigged up my old 045 Super (87cc) on a 32" bar and really liked the smoothness of it on 15" red oak. Will be using that setup and 3/8 chain for most of my smaller (sub-25") diameter hardwood now. Used it for awhile and then a 660 running a 42" bar with 3/8 chain in Mexico on 28-36" diameter guanacastle trees (kinda like monkeypod). It worked okay but it was my first days of milling and could have done a lot of things better, like kept after the sharpening way more. I have belatedly learned that I'm running my milling chains way too dull most of the time and constant sharpening makes all the difference in the world to what a saw can handle. I worked with a local in Mexico who did freehand milling with a 72 cc saw and he sharpened his chain so regularly that I was amazed how well it cut compared to our much bigger saws that I rarely sharpened while out in the field. I kept trying to figure out how we could get a setup when I was in Mexico to mill guanacastle up to 48" running the 660, and the most I ever thought was reasonable for it was a 50" Cannon and even had my doubts about that and never pulled the trigger. I bought the 880 once I moved to Texas and it was actually the saw I needed down in Mexico and the 660 is more what I need up here. Of course a huge part of it too is how hard the wood you're cutting is. Mesquite is insanely hard for a North American wood. I like the 880 for it but am happy with a lesser saw for red oak, rock elm, and ash. Safety is a consideration to at the long bar end of the range, most people don't want to take too much chance with 3/8 chain moving past 50", a number of people not comfortable with it much past 42". The big .404 .063 chain on the 880 gives you pretty good peace of mind. If you're mostly milling BIG trees, I feel like the 880 or 3120 is the way to go. My issue with getting a really wide mill and expensive bar and chain for a 660 was it never quite seemed worth investing in for only the occasional big tree if I wasn't going to custom mod the saw for max power (or know what I know now about sharpening). The 880 allowed me to skip everything in between and just buy a massive 72" bar to handle anything in the 36 to 60" range. The new hyperskip Oregon chain with a pair of cutters every 9" seemed like it would be great for reducing power needs for big bars and let you stretch the capabilities of a 660/661, but as it was designed for big Lucas Mills with giant .404 bars they only make it in .404 and so it's no use for the 661's. I bought it for both my 36" and 72" bars for the 880, but decided ultimately it makes little sense in as small a bar as 36" and normal skip would be better.

I'm just starting to put equipment together a mill. Trying to decide on mill length and bar lenght for MS661. I have some big blow downs after the timber company logged next to our place. Douglas firs butt logs are clear and not a lot of taper with the butts being in 42 to 45" diameter. I thinking a 36" mill maybe to short and was looking at 48" mill. A 42" Oregon bar is the longest I can get around here and would probably be long enough but I just not sure? I have zero experience with mill looking for some advice on Mill and bar length.

 

[SeMoTony]

I'm just starting to put equipment together a mill. Trying to decide on mill length and bar lenght for MS661. I have some big blow downs after the timber company logged next to our place. Douglas firs butt logs are clear and not a lot of taper with the butts being in 42 to 45" diameter. I thinking a 36" mill maybe to short and was looking at 48" mill. A 42" Oregon bar is the longest I can get around here and would probably be long enough but I just not sure? I have zero experience with mill looking for some advice on Mill and bar length.

I've gotten 50" and 60" cannon bars for my ported 661. They are stiff, high quality and pricey. I did find a forester 72" bar , just in case, which was less than either of the cannon bars.
Searched a lotta days for "72" bar for the specific mount" when it showed up it was mine. Good luck in your search.
42" Oregon is bar that sees the most use milling, usually on the 046 or ms 460
On larger diameter logs than cut length, taking the 1st slice and rolling log to take slabs off at a 90° from 1st slice can work.
As far as chains, I use square chisel skip. When sharpening the angle is brought closer to 5° each time. The squarer it becomes the less is being cut for faster speed and less side push. The skip allows room for chips so as to not clog and bind.
G'day gents

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

I'm just starting to put equipment together a mill. Trying to decide on mill length and bar lenght for MS661. I have some big blow downs after the timber company logged next to our place. Douglas firs butt logs are clear and not a lot of taper with the butts being in 42 to 45" diameter. I thinking a 36" mill maybe to short and was looking at 48" mill. A 42" Oregon bar is the longest I can get around here and would probably be long enough but I just not sure? I have zero experience with mill looking for some advice on Mill and bar length.

Definitely 48" mill for those big West Coast firs - I only recently discovered after many years of doing this that the listed length of rails on the mill doesn't take into account the inch wide posts and clamps at each end. I can maybe squeeze 35" of cut width out of my 42" Stihl bar but in my 36" mill I'm maxed by the mill at a cutting width of 34". I trimmed most of the taper out of the big cottonwood trunk I did last weekend down to 34" so I could just do it with the 42" bar and 36" mill. Just my thoughts as a woodworker, but I don't know anyone who wants tables flared at one end so I don't bother with crotch cuts or preserving base flare/taper in most of my slabs. A lot of people end up using bars a foot or two bigger than most of what they're cutting just to handle the taper, which slows down milling and costs a lot more for those chain and bars.

A 50 or 52" bar would be a good match for a 48" mill. But the prices for 52's have gone goofy, the cheapest quality ones are $250 or so now compared to as little as $100 online for an Oregon 42" bar. And the quality Cannon and GB 50-52" bars are $500 and up. I'd start with a 48" mill and a 42" bar and do like Tony says and roll the logs on their sides to do first cuts on each side to narrow the width to 34-35" or so. Given bark and poor edgewood quality, you can take at least two inches off side without losing anything you wouldn't in final trimming anyway. And that's off the narrowest waist width. All too often I see people referring to 40-45" logs where they're measuring the widest part, and the trimmed straight width of the log actually ends up no more than 34".

 

[SeMoTony]

Definitely 48" mill for those big West Coast firs - I only recently discovered after many years of doing this that the listed length of rails on the mill doesn't take into account the inch wide posts and clamps at each end. I can maybe squeeze 35" of cut width out of my 42" Stihl bar but in my 36" mill I'm maxed by the mill at a cutting width of 34". I trimmed most of the taper out of the big cottonwood trunk I did last weekend down to 34" so I could just do it with the 42" bar and 36" mill. Just my thoughts as a woodworker, but I don't know anyone who wants tables flared at one end so I don't bother with crotch cuts or preserving base flare/taper in most of my slabs. A lot of people end up using bars a foot or two bigger than most of what they're cutting just to handle the taper, which slows down milling and costs a lot more for those chain and bars.

A 50 or 52" bar would be a good match for a 48" mill. But the prices for 52's have gone goofy, the cheapest quality ones are $250 or so now compared to as little as $100 online for an Oregon 42" bar. And the quality Cannon and GB 50-52" bars are $500 and up. I'd start with a 48" mill and a 42" bar and do like Tony says and roll the logs on their sides to do first cuts on each side to narrow the width to 34-35" or so. Given bark and poor edgewood quality, you can take at least two inches off side without losing anything you wouldn't in final trimming anyway. And that's off the narrowest waist width. All too often I see people referring to 40-45" logs where they're measuring the widest part, and the trimmed straight width of the log actually ends up no more than 34".

Another aspect I forgot is that about 2 inches can be gained on a cut by drilling 1/4" hole, center of sprocket. D&T center of 3/4 or 1 inch round aluminum bar for the upright. 1/4" bolt with lock washer holds it all together. 1" or 3/4" bolt is all it takes. I use round as that takes a fraction off the distance to center vs. acorner
See all the holes drilled in xaust can? Just like a screen only different. Kept adding till it worked best. Whoever did the work on that cylinder achieved an excellent flow rate, muf can came MT. Exhaust port opened, shaped n polished lol. The lil round hole in that can got opened to as large a rectangle as possible before screen was replaced,
Semi skip on 42" & shorter
Enjoy safely

 

[James Sawyer]

Definitely 48" mill for those big West Coast firs - I only recently discovered after many years of doing this that the listed length of rails on the mill doesn't take into account the inch wide posts and clamps at each end. I can maybe squeeze 35" of cut width out of my 42" Stihl bar but in my 36" mill I'm maxed by the mill at a cutting width of 34". I trimmed most of the taper out of the big cottonwood trunk I did last weekend down to 34" so I could just do it with the 42" bar and 36" mill. Just my thoughts as a woodworker, but I don't know anyone who wants tables flared at one end so I don't bother with crotch cuts or preserving base flare/taper in most of my slabs. A lot of people end up using bars a foot or two bigger than most of what they're cutting just to handle the taper, which slows down milling and costs a lot more for those chain and bars.

A 50 or 52" bar would be a good match for a 48" mill. But the prices for 52's have gone goofy, the cheapest quality ones are $250 or so now compared to as little as $100 online for an Oregon 42" bar. And the quality Cannon and GB 50-52" bars are $500 and up. I'd start with a 48" mill and a 42" bar and do like Tony says and roll the logs on their sides to do first cuts on each side to narrow the width to 34-35" or so. Given bark and poor edgewood quality, you can take at least two inches off side without losing anything you wouldn't in final trimming anyway. And that's off the narrowest waist width. All too often I see people referring to 40-45" logs where they're measuring the widest part, and the trimmed straight width of the log actually ends up no more than 34".

my log measurements are off the butt so you are correct depending on the log you can have a lot of taper. I tend to fall high on the stump so out of the flare if its lot easier on the knees. These trees are blow down so straight buck off the root wad. Think over your advice I need run up the hill and look at these trees again, maybe I can get away with a 42" bar. I called the shop today and I can get Oregon .063 gauge bar for $105 and they have one. Bars are sometimes hard to come by now at least 32", 36" and 42"'s the steel bar are little easier to come by.

I'm thinking 48" mill is little difficult to deal with milling smaller logs and what I'm going to use for rails and getting below the rail attachment on the 1st cut. Guy with portable mill can't handle these large dia. logs. besides I don't have cat anymore get them off the hill. My dad said he'd haul his cat up to the house but its not worth the trucking. Primary I'm looking at at least one of these tree to cut some bridge beams out of. Both trees the 1st logs are #1 peeler clear hate to waste them. The other tree I could cut the rest of the 4x 8" treads.

I bought this ms661 so I could mill these logs but haven't bought a mill yet or milling bar. Mostly want mill for the experience and just hate wasting these trees. I do have other saws so could double headed mill with XP372x, MS460, my MS461 need rebuilt. Really not serious yet... I think taken you advice look at these trees and see if I can get away with 42" bar.

 

[SeMoTony]

my log measurements are off the butt so you are correct depending on the log you can have a lot of taper. I tend to fall high on the stump so out of the flare if its lot easier on the knees. These trees are blow down so straight buck off the root wad. Think over your advice I need run up the hill and look at these trees again, maybe I can get away with a 42" bar. I called the shop today and I can get Oregon .063 gauge bar for $105 and they have one. Bars are sometimes hard to come by now at least 32", 36" and 42"'s the steel bar are little easier to come by.

I'm thinking 48" mill is little difficult to deal with milling smaller logs and what I'm going to use for rails and getting below the rail attachment on the 1st cut. Guy with portable mill can't handle these large dia. logs. besides I don't have cat anymore get them off the hill. My dad said he'd haul his cat up to the house but its not worth the trucking. Primary I'm looking at at least one of these tree to cut some bridge beams out of. Both trees the 1st logs are #1 peeler clear hate to waste them. The other tree I could cut the rest of the 4x 8" treads.

I bought this ms661 so I could mill these logs but haven't bought a mill yet or milling bar. Mostly want mill for the experience and just hate wasting these trees. I do have other saws so could double headed mill with XP372x, MS460, my MS461 need rebuilt. Really not serious yet... I think taken you advice look at these trees and see if I can get away with 42" bar.

Rails are available up to 72". They will replace/lengthen that part so the clamps, uprights etc. is just swapped. That is what is in use on the 60" & 72" bars to ride the ladder-guide that I use.
G'day gents

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

m thinking 48" mill is little difficult to deal with milling smaller logs and what I'm going to use for rails and getting below the rail attachment on the 1st cut.

That's why I have a 36" mill for 9/10 of my milling and bought a 60" mill rail kit from Granberg I can swap out in it when I go beyond 34" cut width. I agree, it can be cumbersome at times to have more mill width than you need. If your primary purpose is big beams, 36" mill and 42" bar will serve you well. Understood the butt width was what you measured, and guess the waist is no more than 39" or so? So taking 2-3 inches off each side gets you to 34". Everything else you could ever want to know about technique, winching, setting up first cuts, etc, is somewhere in the archives of this site. The main thing coming from cross cutting is understanding it's a VERY slow process in comparison and not trying to speed it up by rocking the saw back and forth or winching/pushing too hard because that's what produces ugly results. With good sharp chain the saw should cut virtually on autopilot (as it does when you bury the dogs on a big crosscut and let it rotate) so it's just a matter of keeping the mill level and letting the saw do its thing.

You can go down an infinite rabbit hole of chain types and sharpening angles, but beyond 5-10 degree ripping chain being fairly standard, it's mostly whatever you're best at sharpening (semi chisel, square, etc). And for opportunistically milling Doug firs for beams, you don't need to overthink it, it's fairly easy wood to mill.

 

[SeMoTony]

Gotchya so I'm thinking I'm gonna go with the granberg 48" mill. I have done a bit of research and from my info it seems that the 661 shouldn't be used with anything bigger then 48" and that's already pushing the limits. I want this saw to last me a while for the tree business as well as free-time milling, so anything bigger then 48" for chainsaw milling should be double power head milled which I dont see myself milling anything bigger then 48". Hell that's a sheet of plywood Haha. But since I'm getting into the tree business how big of a bar could I put on the 661 for just falling a tree cuz that's way less torque needy

In avatar is 60" cannon bar, 3/8" .063 skip square chisel. Powered by ms-460 muf mods and max flo air filter. Ran much nicer while milling maple on a ported 661lol

 

[SeMoTony]

This is to be expected - the 046 has 1/3rd HP per inch available to is whereas the 661 has less than a 1/5HP per inch.
Even my 441 in a 21" cut has more HP/in than my 880 in a 42" cut.

My 661 has a breathing assist in porting. Once it broke in she will carry that 72 square chisel combo. May be even faster than an 880 with same b& c since epa chokes down air flo on self powered air pumps of the last couple decades.
A guy with a stock 661 asked what saw I had (046 muf mods, maxflo air) since it was out performing his larger saw. Wish I had my ported 661 with to show him what he was missing