Bar for bucking hardwood

Wesspur
Rugged made
Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
K

koutoukos

ArboristSite Lurker
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
10
Reaction score
3
Location
Greece
Greetings to all,

I have a need for a 28” bar for bucking hardwood.

Do I need a lightweight or a standard bar?
Does a standard construction bar is more suitable for hefty cuts?
Does the extra weight is better for that type of cutting?

My current setup is a Stihl 462 with a 20” ES light.

Thanks in advance
 
Stihl es or light would both do the trick. The light bars cut the same just weigh less and balance better in longer bars. There’s also quite a few other makers that make nice bars.
 
I'm using a Woodland Pro 28" on my makita 6401 w/bigbore kit. Just a little nose heavy but ok. I would think it would be similar for the 462. If you are cutting wood that big, I don't believe the difference in weight will make a lot of difference in cutting but may result in more fatigue from lifting the saw after the cuts.
 
I had the impression that the manufacturing process of the light version was not ideal for the high temperatures of hardwood.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
koutoukos said:
Greetings to all,

I have a need for a 28” bar for bucking hardwood.

Do I need a lightweight or a standard bar?
Does a standard construction bar is more suitable for hefty cuts?
Does the extra weight is better for that type of cutting?

My current setup is a Stihl 462 with a 20” ES light.

Thanks in advance
Click to expand...
I use the Stihl Rollomatic standard 28" bar on my Stihl 044 Magnum and although a bit tip heavy, it's a strong bar to cut all my large hardwood rounds with.
Once it's on the log and in the cut it makes no difference what weight the bar is.
Just need to man up and do the job.(lol)
I also use it to fell and mill with.
 
Bucking hardwood i think a little extra weight helps the saw feed through the wood on its own without having to use the spikes so much to get through the cut at the same speed resulting in less effort on the operators part. Stand straight up, saw feeds itself through the wood, back feels great vs. bending over to use the spikes. I haven't used true lightweight bars myself but i don't expect they are as durable. Seems to me they would be best suited for long days felling trees on slopes and the like where your saw is beeing carried a lot verses moved cut to cut. I go out to the woods in my pickup, cut 1 to 5 trees down usually and buck up the wood to 16inch firewood. Seems to me that the extra dollars for a lightweight bar would be a waste of money and it would be easiar to damage should something go wrong. It might be nice to have a saw set up with a 20in or shorter lightweight bar for felling trees on ditchbanks that i do a little of but as of now my lightweight saw for that is an 025 w/16inch b&c that weighs little to start. Bigger trees i use bigger saws but 90%+ my 034super w/ a 20in es bar is light and big enough to work with comfortably a big part of the day.
 
Brushwacker said:
Bucking hardwood i think a little extra weight helps the saw feed through the wood on its own without having to use the spikes so much to get through the cut at the same speed resulting in less effort on the operators part. Stand straight up, saw feeds itself through the wood, back feels great vs. bending over to use the spikes. I haven't used true lightweight bars myself but i don't expect they are as durable. Seems to me they would be best suited for long days felling trees on slopes and the like where your saw is beeing carried a lot verses moved cut to cut. I go out to the woods in my pickup, cut 1 to 5 trees down usually and buck up the wood to 16inch firewood. Seems to me that the extra dollars for a lightweight bar would be a waste of money and it would be easiar to damage should something go wrong. It might be nice to have a saw set up with a 20in or shorter lightweight bar for felling trees on ditchbanks that i do a little of but as of now my lightweight saw for that is an 025 w/16inch b&c that weighs little to start. Bigger trees i use bigger saws but 90%+ my 034super w/ a 20in es bar is light and big enough to work with comfortably a big part of the day.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I had in my mind in the first place.

If the bar is used exclusively for bucking, perhaps the standard version is more adequate and error proofing...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
ElevatorGuy said:
A guy on another forum has a very detailed post proving that wrong.
Click to expand...

ElevatorGuy said:
I have to say this about Stihl bars, they cut and wear very well , better then comprible Oregon bars which has been a primary standard stock on many or most saws around here since i remember with the exception of stihl. They make a good laminate bar up to 20in i haven't found a laminate bar that has worked as well. In my area i usually find stihl bars less expensive then comprible Oregon. I've used cannon and tsumara which may be a bit better , but at a price. Older gb titanium bars have worked well for me also.
Click to expand...
 
ElevatorGuy said:
I personally would want a light bar in 28” on a 462 Just for the balance. Better options exist than stihl though.
Click to expand...
Why would u want your saw to balance bucking wood? I want the weight on the bar so i don't have to push the saw through . Same reason i prefer a heavy maul for splitting the big blocks of wood vs an axe.
 
Brushwacker said:
Why would u want your saw to balance bucking wood? I want the weight on the bar so i don't have to push the saw through . Same reason i prefer a heavy maul for splitting the big blocks of wood vs an axe.
Click to expand...
A balanced saw is more efficient, less fatigue. I prefer a hydraulic splitter to either.
 
koutoukos said:
I had the impression that the manufacturing process of the light version was not ideal for the high temperatures of hardwood.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I dunno about that. Loggers out here have been using lightweight stihl bars regularly. I personally run a 24" lightweight on a johny 2166 because it balances best with the light bar. The 2166 gets to ride in the bucket sometimes and I prefer a saw the sets level, especially from the bucket. Im suprised no one has brought up that the 462 will have its hands full with a 28" bar in hardwood.
 
In my case the 462 will be used 80% of the time with the 20" (es light) and the other 20% will be with the longer bar. I wondering if the standard ES will be more forgiving in case of a user error. For example if I bend the bar, won' t be easier to be fixed?

Do you think that the 462 will be particularly stressed if I use it with the 28" on hardwood? The average use of the longer bar will be for for about 5 hours per year.
My wife permits only bucking...
 
koutoukos said:
In my case the 462 will be used 80% of the time with the 20" (es light) and the other 20% will be with the longer bar. I wondering if the standard ES will be more forgiving in case of a user error. For example if I bend the bar, won' t be easier to be fixed?

Do you think that the 462 will be particularly stressed if I use it with the 28" on hardwood? The average use of the longer bar will be for for about 5 hours per year.
My wife permits only bucking...
Click to expand...
The 462 will pull the 28 fine and will be a monster with the 20.
 

Similar threads

ace4059
Oregon Versacut bar
Replies
10
Views
2K
Philbert
P
G
Stihl light bar
Replies
13
Views
2K
altatim
altatim
A
Stihl Bar and Chain Weights
Replies
1
Views
898
Coralillo Lo Pro
Coralillo Lo Pro
G
Help deciding on Stihl Saw
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
6K
Chris Rau
Chris Rau
P
In the market for a bigger saw
2 3
Replies
40
Views
4K
Pjohnson
P

Latest posts

Back
Top