Biodegradable bar oil...... anybody use it?

[glens]

TJB,

Maybe it's all a conspiracy by the oil companies, but for the moment let's pretend that they are truthful and used motor oils are harmful to handle due to the concentrated contaminants they carry.  Let's also say you're safe and wear your Playtex Living Gloves whenever you fill your bar oil reservoir.  Do you deny that there is a fine mist aura in the vicinity of your bar when the chain is in service?  Is it indeed possible for you to come in contact with that mist while using your saw?

You're young and will probably live for ever with no detrimental effects from any other activity so you'll be entirely safe in this as well.

You <i>do</i> filter out the metallic and other debris your used motor oil contains, before you put it in your chainsaw, right?&nbsp; The oil pump does not like to contend with wear-caused-and-causing material, and neither do the bar and chain.

We're probably all better off if you take your used oil and recycle it so those with the leaking oil pans, valve stem seals, and piston rings can buy it for half price at the Quickie-Mart.

Glen

 

[Stumper]

TimberjackBOY, I an not an environmental whacko. I am not terrified of bar oil -I use vegetable oil in my climbing saw and powerpruner because I think it MIGHT be better for the trees I prune, the climbing saw throws more stuff in my face than a "normal" chainsaw usage would and it DEFINITELY works better in those saws. I use standard bar oil in my large saws without fear or guilt-but am considering extending my use of veggie oil for my own benefit. Used motor oil is an extremely stupid way to "save" money. Several people are trying to explain this to you. Please listen.

 

[Mange]

The bar oil has qualities that engine oils don't and wise versa. Do you put wasted transmission oils in as well?, or fresh even.
The veg. oil is still a bar oil with all its qualities, and here is not much difference in price. I run dino oil in my 152 saws, but that is for no special reason. As for cleaning this veg. oil that can be a sad moment.
Here it is not much different in consistence, even a little slower, and Husqvarna mean you can reduce the amount of oil on to the bar, with same result.

 

[Tree Machine]

This is not a frickin joke

Timberjackboy, I'm only going on over this because I DID use spent chipper oil for awhile. It made sense to me; out of the chipper, into a gallon jug, ready for use in the saws. It saved me having to store it, transport it to the oil recycling place, etc. It seemed more environmentally sensible, besides being free.

But I only ran a couple gallons through. I can talk to you firsthand and tell you the smell of used oil reeks of stanky stankity stank. The 'aura of mist' Glen refers to is real, and if the wind is not in your favor, it's on you. Since you have no choice but to breath, it's in you. We chainsaw users have enough poison going into us with the occasional inhalation of exhaust fumes.

The human bod can only take so much of this, and then I refer back to the washing of your clothes and having cross-contamination into other parts of your laundry, a gift from you to the ones you love.

TJB, it's just not worth prostituting your health to save a few bucks. The cost of chemotherapy will far exceed the savings you feel you enjoy now. Extrapolate 20 years down the road, try to imagine the amount of oil funk you'll ingest, inhale and wear in contact with your skin. Ask yourself, is it really worth it in exchange for a few dollars saved? I'm not preaching some personal gospel here. You're a fellow tree man-chainsaw brother and I care about you.

 

[bwalker]

Used mototr oil is full of nasty carcinogens and heavy metals. Not to mention the fact that it is acidic and over time will attack the magnesium/aluminum parts on your saw and its oiling system.
Now, as far as Bio oil goes. I cant use it at the price it sells for now. I dont really condisder veggy oil a alternative because it has no tac agent and breathing it is probaly no better than breathing regular bar oil.
On alternative that i would like to see would be a ester based bar oil and also one made out of food grade dino oil(aka baby oil). Both would be better than regular bar oil and would cost much less than the bio stuff.

 

[Tree Machine]

breathing it is probaly no better than breathing regular bar oil.

Huh? whaa??

food grade dino oil(aka baby oil)

You are describing a slippery, petoleum-based chemical.

Now, as far as Bio oil goes. I cant use it at the price it sells for now.

Are you talking 'bio oil' as in a Brand-name product called 'Bio oil'?, or do you mean biological oil like a food oil or do you mean biodegradable oil like anything that would biodegrade (which can mean ANY oil, technically speaking?

Let me focus that question; Bio-oil, like commercial bar oil that is marketed and sold as bar oil, THAT is the stuff that is too expensive, yes?

Well, yes. That stuff is expensive. I don't know why. I imagine it's 99% vegetable oil. How much does that stuff cost?

it has no tac agent

This, I feel, is the largest conspiracy ever attempted on a population our size. Saw users forever have been guided as a flock of chainsaw-wielding sheep, and we were told to use petroleum-based oil and that it had this cool additive called Tac. Tac is an additive that theoretically keeps the oil from flying off the chain.

I remember years ago filling up a tank of gas and oil. When you run out of gas, ya basically run out of oil. But this oil had TAC in it. Tac keeps the oil from flying off the chain.

But I filled a tank of oil, and not a tank of oil left on the bar. In fact, there's essentially no oil left on it, just a deposit in the guide rail. Where did the rest of the oil go? That's right, men, it flew off the bar.

Think about it, a tank in, a tank out, none of it stays with the bar. It passes through, and into the wood you are cutting.

Whether Tac is real, or whether it was some deliberate marketing scheme that we took as truth, and have used ever since by convention (i.e. the way it's always been done...), the fact of the matter is that no matter what you put in the oil tank, it's gonna fly off the bar.

For the environmental record, I think tac and the whole concept of Tac is the biggest spoonful of crap we've ever been fed. The benefit is a perceived one only! You do the math, tank in, tank out.

I'm sorry to have called us sheep, that was just metaphorical. It is not our fault; we inherited it from our forefathers

 

[glens]

Hi Jim.

I don't know specifically what they're using for a tack additive, but it <i>does</i> help to keep the lubricant from flinging off the chain quite so rapidly.&nbsp; I first became aware of lubricants with such additives back in my motorcycle days, using them on my drive chain.&nbsp; They <i>do</i> make a difference.

Perhaps you feel they can't <i>really</i> make a 5-weight oil behave like a 30-weight oil when it's hotter and would normally become thinner.&nbsp; Do you run straight or multi-weight oil in your crankcase?

Back to the overall discussion, assuming none of the oil ended up on/in one's person, but instead was totally deposited elsewhere, the equivalent would be taking a gallon of whatever oil (animal/vegetable/mineral/synthetic in new/used form), opening the container, and dribbling it on the ground as you walked along.&nbsp; Which form of lubricant sufficient for the chain/bar would be the best to do that with?&nbsp; Other than everyone acknowledging the used oil as bad (and they should), how much of a difference does it really make between the new products?&nbsp; (maybe other than the feeling I have in general that it might be a bad idea to spew synthetics around)

Glen

 

[bwalker]

Glen,ld like to point out the ester based synthetics are many times better than dino oils in regards to bio degradation.

 

[bwalker]

BTW I wouldnt assume that inhalling vegi oil is nay better for you than in halling virgin petrol bar oil.

 

[Tree Machine]

Think indepedently

Vegi oil is food. We've been putting it in our bodies all our lives, albeit, not in our lungs. It is non-toxic, generally recognized as safe. We still try not to inhale it.

Still believing in the Tac theory, Glen, as applied to a chainsaw?. OK, try this. Take your oil that has tac in it. Put three or 4 drops on your right thumb and squeeze those drops using your right forefinger. Now pull your thumb and forefinger apart. See how that oil behaves? like a dozen little 'threads. That's what Tac does. It makes petoleum-based oil 'sticky'

So why does this sticky oil not stay on the bar and chain? Just as much that goes on, comes off. If you could turn your oiler down to half, then your tac would be allowing you to use 50% of the amount of oil you'd normally use. This would be good. Nobody really messes with the oil flow adjustment though. One tank in = one tank into the environment. It's not like a motorcycle chain. There, you oil the chain and you want the oil to stay on so you don't have to re-oil very often.

In a chainsaw, oiling is continuous. There is always oil being pumped into the guide bar, right where is needs to be, keeping the driver links and rail lubed. Attempting to keep the oil ON the chain is a flat out folly if you are continuously pumping it in. If you are continuously pumping it in, the chain is pretty much assured of staying lubricated, both the top rail, and the bottom rail, driver links, bar tip and and drive sprocket. Some of it will stay in the rail groove, some will fly off. This will be true whether petrochemical, 5-weight, 50-weight, synthetic oil, mineral oil, bio-oil, or straight-up canola or corn oil. One tank in = one tank out. That is just how it is.

Where does that tank of bar oil go? Just think about it the next time you're running a saw. It may be invisible to you where exactly your bar oil is going, but that does not make it any less real that it is going somewhere. I'm not asking anyone to change, just to consider that maybe, just mebbe we've all been fed a line if crap for a long time. The fact that Sweden uses nothing but biodegradable oil should say something to the rest of us. American treeguys, this is just part of our upbringing as a nation who uses and often wastes petoleum products without even considering the impact or repercussions. I would go as far as to say it is a brainwash. All we look at is cost.

I invite you to be objective reevaluate this outdated truth and consider the Tac issue as a marketing ploy to get you to buy a product called 'Bar oil' rather than a product called '10W-40 motor oil', both are nearly identical. Those industries just want to sell you their product. They don't want you to know peanut oil will work equally well as bar lubricant because they will sell less Dino oil and it will cut into their profits. This is the bottom line.

 

[glens]

Jim,

I agree with you almost entirely <i>except</i> for your tack additive position.&nbsp; Nobody is saying it's meant to keep the oil on the bar indefinitely, and direct comparison to motorcycle drive chain is stretching it a little.&nbsp; On the bike, the only external wear takes place as the side plates conform to the pitch diameter of the sprocket and again when it leaves for the span to the other.&nbsp; On a chainsaw, there is friction between the chain and the bar most all the way around the circuit.

The tack additive is to ensure that some of the oil will still be present to fling off while the chain is rounding the drive sprocket.&nbsp; Whatever lubricant you're using, it hangs on well enough if you've got some being dispersed inside your clutch cover.&nbsp; If it takes an additive of <i>whatever kind</i> to allow that to happen, it's worth the couple of pennies.&nbsp; Again, the tack additive is not meant to completely prevent the oil from being flung off the chain; its purpose is merely to delay it.&nbsp; And that it does.&nbsp; It also extends the temperature range where the oil is suitable.&nbsp; You would need less tack additive with 90-weight than with 5, but you couldn't use the heavier oil in cooler temperatures.

Actually, "bar oil" is cheaper than 10w40, anyway.

Glen

 

[Tree Machine]

Jim, direct comparison to motorcycle drive chain is stretching it a little

I don't feel I intended a comparison, as they're two different needs. I just stated a fact or two as I used to ride motorcycles, too.

On a chainsaw, there is friction between the chain and the bar most all the way around the circuit. The tack additive is to ensure that some of the oil will still be present to fling off while the chain is rounding the drive sprocket.

And my statement is this: Lubricant will stay on the chain, enough to lubricate the bar sufficiently, whether it has tac, does not have tac, is used motor oil, new motor oil, synthetic oil, corn, soybean, canola.... enough will make it around to keep both the bar's topside and the underside lubricated. If it did not, you would know it within severel tanks of tac-less oil that something's not right. Right?.

I have put through severel Hundred tanks, and have never, not even once, had problems with my bar not getting proper lubricant. The 395 with the 3 foot bar is testimony. I run that thing like a banshee through big wood at full RPMs for long periods. Veggie oil works just swell.

Again, the tack additive is not meant to completely prevent the oil from being flung off the chain; its purpose is merely to delay it. And that it does.Glen

And I say it does not; not enough to make it superior over biodegradable lubricants. I have firsthand experience in this over the course of years of commercial tree service. Oil with Tac lubricates the bar acceptably. Canola oil lubricates the bar acceptably. Both oils are, in this sense, are equal.

 

[Tree Machine]

Honestly, Tac is the biggest dupe we've ever experienced. It's benefit is negligible. I'm not sure chemically what Tac even is, but I'll bet if we knew, it would be a chemical foreign to our bodies, and maybe toxic.

Personally, I think only the concept exists. I think the reality of Tac can be viewed as a marketing tool to get us to buy certain oil. We've been living this as gospel, and have been faithfully and unquestioningly buying this stuff listed as 'bar oil' because that's just the way its always been. Conventional 'wisdom'.

If there are readers out there who sell bar oil, you will naturally be biased and in disagreement with all this. That's because you make money from the sales of it. I'm sorry to put you in the position of this information, but we need to be ecologically responsible. We are tree care professionals, stewards to the environment.... and we're spraying tank after tank of persistent, petroleum-based oil into the environment day after day? Sort of a disconnect there between intent and result.

 

[glens]

You're not arguing just against what I've said, Jim.&nbsp; There is no such magical thing you're referring to as "Tac".&nbsp; It's just some compound which increases the ability of the oil (of whatever kind) to stay attached to the chain in the face of adverse conditions.&nbsp; Without it, whatever lubricant you're using, you <i>will use more in any given time frame</i> than with it.&nbsp; It may be a wash in cost, and it may be more detrimental to the environment on any or all levels; or not.

I'm not advocating one lubricant type over another; merely stating that with a tack additive, <i>any</i> oil will stay on the chain measurably longer, thus decreasing the flow rate required.

Good evening.&nbsp; I've been sending some wind your way, did it make it there okay?

Glen

 

[Tree Machine]

It's just some compound which increases the ability of the oil (of whatever kind) to stay attached to the chain in the face of adverse conditions.Glen

"Some compound" ? could you define that more clearly for us. I'm somewhat curious as to know WHAT this compound is. What do you mean by, "adverse conditions?"

Without it (Tac) whatever lubricant you're using, you <i>will use more in any given time frame</i> than with it.Glen

Tank in STILL = tank out. Tac does not 'cause' the use of less oil. Only the saw operator tweaking down the flow control does this. Practically speaking, nobody messes much with the oiler flow control. Many saw users don't even know where it is. Most don't care and will use the saw at the factory setting, so unless YOU turn down your oiler adjustment, there will NOT be less oil used in any given time frame. No matter what your flow rate, as much as you put on will equal the amount that comes off.

merely stating that with a tack additive, <i>any</i> oil will stay on the chain measurably longer, thus decreasing the flow rate required. Glen

For the sake of rational argument, I will agree on that last point (even though I don't) And the point I still try to get you to see is that there becomes an equilibrium where the amount of oil going onto the chain equals the amount of oil going off the chain, making tac essentially functionless.

Glen, you're going on heresay passed down through generations of saw users through the preachings of those who sell the product, and possible the saw manufacturers going along with it out of convenience.

 

[glens]

Hi JIm.&nbsp; Did you get that wind I sent your way last night?

Tank in STILL = tank out. Tac does not 'cause' the use of less oil. Only the saw operator tweaking down the flow control does this.

Once again, Jim, I say you're not arguing against anything I've said.&nbsp; Saying it the other way 'round, you're arguing against things I <i>didn't</i> say.

I don't have the foggiest notion what it is that you're referring to by "Tac".&nbsp; It seems as if for some reason you think it's supposed to be some magical elixir that, given the chance, might even transform lead into gold or something.&nbsp; All I know is that there are additives which make lubricants variously behave in ways inconsistent with their "natural" tendencies.&nbsp; One type of them allows motor oils to behave like a finer oil when cold and like a heavier oil when hot.&nbsp; Are you denying <i>that</i>?&nbsp; If not, why suggest that lubricants cannot be made to to their job while also adhering more strongly to the surface they're on?

merely stating that with a tack additive, any oil will stay on the chain measurably longer, thus decreasing the flow rate required.

For the sake of rational argument, I will agree on that last point (even though I don't) And the point I still try to get you to see is that there becomes an equilibrium where the amount of oil going onto the chain equals the amount of oil going off the chain, making tac essentially functionless.

Jim, you do not need to waste another moment of energy trying to get me to see that most all the oil you put on the chain ends up off the chain eventually.&nbsp; I've not even <i>considered</i> trying to say that it doesn't.&nbsp; In <i>that</i> sense, your "tac" <i>is</i> essentially functionless.&nbsp; But, where you're not thinking this through is when you argue that the oil flings off the chain <i>at the same rate</i> with or without the tack additives.&nbsp; This is really what you're saying, and it's understandable if you honestly think oil cannot be made to adhere more strongly to the chain components.&nbsp; That does not make it a correct position to take, however.

Glen, you're going on heresay passed down through generations of saw users through the preachings of those who sell the product, and possible the saw manufacturers going along with it out of convenience.

I'm not even listening to them.&nbsp; Rather, I'm going on past experience using various lubricants in various ways and noting the results.&nbsp; If I use 10W-40 on my motorcycle chain and it's everywhere but on the chain after one block, but it stays on for hundreds of miles if I use a lubricant with tack additive, I don't need to send a letter to Johnny Carson and have him hold it up to his turban to see if it's true.&nbsp; That the same effect can be and is had with chainsaw chain is a no-brainer, and I truly don't understand your position on this.

Glen

 

[caryr]

 

[Tree Machine]

Yea, let's shift back to topic

Thanks for the wind yesterday, Glen. Had to crown reduce a monster Bradford Pear, tossing the material downwind of the crown. It helped my job along.

Boiling it down, vegetable oil, without tac keeps a CHAINSAW bar, rail and groove and drivers lubricated. This is just sheer fact. Why then, is is to my advantage to use a bio-toxic, petroleum-based oil that has Tac to achieve the same result?

I'm sorry I argued against things you didn't say, Glen. I just try to speak from a practical standpoint, from direct experience over time.

Anyway this thread is not about Tac, or petroleum-based bar oil, but, as Caryr notes, is about biodegradable oil. How about something on the topic of that? Questions about any noticible downsides? Instances where you would NOT want to use biodegradable oil? Long-term effects of the use of biodegradable oil on the saw? Negative points you might want to know about? Oil behavior in sub-freezing temperatures? These would be good questions to ask.

 

[Timberjackboy]

Burnt Oil

Listen boys!!! Burnt oil may affect the life of your chain and bar alittle bit, but as far a sthe rest of the saw goes i get just as much running out of them as anyone else who uses regualar chain oil. apparently noone of you ahve used it so shut up about the negative stuff till you actually try it

 

[Tree Machine]

Down, Simba.