Building a small lumber/log hauler for the ATV

[BIG JAKE]

I've got a little trailer I use for moving logs/lumber. To load logs onto my big trailer, I use two bigger slabs off milled logs as skids to roll logs up into the trailer. Then I can mill logs I didn't have time to mill up in the mountains, at home, as in first pic. Then I made a long frame out of 4x4's for my little John Deere box trailer to haul logs, slabs, and boards(2nd, 3rd pics). This lets me offload lumber/logs from the big trailer straight onto the little one, and move them around easily(4th, 5th pic). The little trailer works good with the 4 wheeler too, to shuttle lumber from remote logs I'm milling out in the woods. It wouldn't work well for loading logs as the hard part would be getting them on there by myself.
Brad you're little trailer is more suitable for log hauling, but it's interesting how some of your techniques on that trailer I use to load logs on my big trailer. I have a 3000lb electric winch in the garage. I'm going to weld receiver tubes at three different positions on the trailer so I can just drop the winch in and pin it depending on which direction I'm loading from. Winch base will be pivoting so it will point straight at the load.
I may incorporate some 2x2 tubes that fold out for ramps, that I can move to either side, rather than the slabs although they work well. Stability would be better anyway.

 

[BIG JAKE]

Here's a better look at my little trailer with nothing in it. I don't really want to butcher it all up though. Maybe I could make a little drop in frame and use a comealong somehow to get logs on there. I would have to lengthen the tongue for sure

 

[Brmorgan]

Yeah I plan on doing the same as you and making a drop-in winch system somehow. I'd love to have a Lewis winch as I could just attach it to any nearby tree as high as I needed to get a bit more leverage. But at the better part of $1k I don't see one of those in my future for a while yet.

The only downside I see to your trailer setup is having to lift the logs an awful lot higher to load. Having said that, once they're up that high, it does make them nice and convenient to unload at working height like in your one pic.


I went out and took another dead Douglas Fir today, this one a bit bigger than the last. I had to fall it about 135° against a pretty good lean, which was a bit tricky and involved some double-wedging, but it went over within a couple feet of where I wanted it, so I was pretty happy. This tree just died this past spring and was still a bit green, and was considerably heavier. It netted me another 6 logs though, four 10' sections, one 12', and an 8' from the butt, which was HEAVY.

The five logs on top and the bottom-left one are all from this tree. There was another 4' of the butt left over, but it had a heavy pitch streak up the center and a significant flare to one side, so I didn't leave it on the bottom sawlog. I'll use it for a saw testing log or some milling supports or something.

I still need to go bring the top home from the log I cut the 26' 8X12 out of back in the spring. I'm not sure how much is left in that log, but it's nice and straight. Harder to get this trailer in to it though.

 

[mtngun]

another dead Douglas Fir today, this one a bit bigger than the last.

That's a good size tree. 30" ? ? ?

 

[Brmorgan]

That's a good size tree. 30" ? ? ?

Nah, not quite... The big end of the 8' butt log (second from left on the top row) is about 18" inside the bark. The base of the short butt piece is about 21" inside the bark. For reference, the handle on my big cant hook is 4' long and the prybar leaning up against the far-left log is 5' long.

 

[Brmorgan]

Well, I've milled one log after work for the last three evenings, so I'm a quarter finished this stack now.

Two sides done on a 12' 8X8 I milled today. This log was still quite green and cut really fast; the 084 ended up washboarding a bit on the last two 8" cuts. It's just for a retaining wall though, so I only need one nice face.

Got the next log all loaded up and ready to go. 8' long, 18" diameter. The three beams I've cut so far are on the pallets in the background; the 8X8 from today is in front, then the two 10' 6X6 pieces one atop the other behind that. The 8X8 behind that is the one I cut back in the spring.

I have a pretty decent pile of edge slabs on a couple pallets at rear-center of the photo there; I figure I'll mill all the heart-center timbers first since it's quick and easy work, and then re-set the mills to recover the slabs later on.

I have a 30" .050 small Stihl mount bar that needs a new tip, and then I can run the LP chain on that bar on my 395 with my adapter.

 

[BobL]

Hey I know that shed too -

Re:Logs
Nice! - care to show a close up of the washboarding?

 

[Brmorgan]

Hey I know that shed too -

Re:Logs
Nice! - care to show a close up of the washboarding?

OK, I'll do that tomorrow if I have time after work.

It washboarded the worst when I held back on the pressure and allowed the RPMs to stay a bit higher - if I pushed harder and let the torque just lug along a thousand turns or so slower, it would smooth out. And it was only in the 8" wide cuts today; the wider first-slab cuts were nice and smooth. Oddly though, it didn't do it the previous two days when cutting the 6" pieces. I know, an 084 for 6" softwood cuts is ridiculous, but it was already mounted on the mill.

It's a 24" 3/8 .063 semi-chisel milling chain at about 10°. I've hand-filed it without a guide a couple times, and also took a FOP to the rakers on the "deep" setting, and it's quite aggressive now, so I'm not surprised to see it washboard. Throws some nice big chips though!

 

[BIG JAKE]

Nice setup/layout you have there. Comfortable for milling. Looks like loads of fun! You'll have quite a pile of sawdust when your done. In a similar situation at home, I've thought a time or two about laying out a tarp so I could easily carry away the chips to a more suitable location. What will you treat the timbers with? 1/2" or 5/8" rebar works good to spike successive timbers together if you drill the hole undersize(long auger bit with extension), then use a sledge to drive 'em home. The ridges hold well in the wood too. Possible, cheap option for the retaining wall anyway.

 

[mrlynx]

When we are talking about using atvs for hauling timber.
Is there anyone using atv-trailers with hydralic crane?
exampel www.avestavagnen.se or www.kranman.com or xyztrading.se
They are pricey but looks like a lot of fun.

 

[Brmorgan]

Bob, it's pouring rain this evening after work so I don't feel like hiking up to grab a pic of that beam just now! Will do if it quits before sunset though.

Nice setup/layout you have there. Comfortable for milling. Looks like loads of fun! You'll have quite a pile of sawdust when your done. In a similar situation at home, I've thought a time or two about laying out a tarp so I could easily carry away the chips to a more suitable location. What will you treat the timbers with? 1/2" or 5/8" rebar works good to spike successive timbers together if you drill the hole undersize(long auger bit with extension), then use a sledge to drive 'em home. The ridges hold well in the wood too. Possible, cheap option for the retaining wall anyway.

It was quite a mess of random boards and logs etc. up there until just a week ago when I spent a couple hours reorganizing stuff onto pallets and reclaiming the land from the weeds that had grown up around everything. It's tough to keep the weeds back because I usually can't get in between everything with the weedwacker. Wish I could dump about a half ton of salt up there to semi-permanently kill everything. Though, where I've left a good heavy layer of sawdust, it's slowed the big weeds down pretty good, so after these logs are all done I might have enough to really choke them off. I do have a sawdust/shavings/chip pile over near the property line, but I generally just spread the fine milling sawdust out on the ground with a rake or the plow on the ATV.

Rebar is exactly what I'm going to use - I've used it on jobs for two yard care / landscaping companies I've worked for and it works great. I'm going to put one layer of Allen blocks or some such in the ground for the base of the wall and then stack the 8X8s on top of this row. This way I don't have to half-bury one of the 8X8s because no matter what I treat it with, it won't hold up long like that. I'll send a few lengths of rebar through the two bottom timbers and the blocks and about 2' into the ground; this should give it some real stability. Not that I think it'll move much since it'll be behind the corner of the foundation of the house at one end, and deadmanned into the hill via a set of steps etc. at the other end. Following rows will also be barred down through the ones below.

As for treating the wood, all non-visible faces will be treated with green Copper II preservative. The backside of the wall will be lined with black plastic; behind this will be a foot of rocks and heavy crushed gravel, and surrounding that will be landscape fabric to prevent dirt from washing in and filling the loose crush up. I'll drill some holes through the base timbers to allow water out the face of the wall, which should keep the backside of the wall well-drained and fairly dry. Or at least that's the idea.

Mrlynx, I've looked at the similar ones that Baileys sells here in North America; they look pretty sweet but I think they start at around $10,000 for a powered hydraulic one. I can't remember anyone using one on this forum, but I could very well have missed something.

 

[Brmorgan]

OK Bob, I got some pics of the washboard cut and the chain finally:

The top face here is the initial first slab cut off the top of the log with the 084 and regular .050 milling chain. It's not the smoothest in the world but is much better than what is to come. The side face here is cut with the 3/8" LP chain on the 066 in the vertical mill. That stuff seems to cut butter smooth no matter what I do to the cutters or rakers; it just cuts faster or slower.

This is the worst section of washboarding. The saw was just sailing through the wood, probably almost 2"/sec, so I'm pretty sure it's just an issue of not enough chain speed for the feed speed. It was throwing some pretty big chips. I have a big length of brand-new LP chain I got at a yardsale in a bucket of random chains, so I think I'm going to make up an LP chain to fit this bar just to see how it does. Either way I'd really like to throw a 9-pin sprocket on it just to see how that does.

Here I was pushing harder and bogging the saw down a bit (which is relative because that 121cc just kept chugging along); cut speed didn't seem to suffer a whole lot though, but it did cut smoother.

Side view of the same chain. The rakers were FOP'd but not since the last filing, I only took a couple passes off the cutters though, so they should be within tolerance still too. I'm too lazy to figure out the cutting angle and everything, but fly at 'er if you like, Bob!

 

[BobL]

Thanks for the pictures Brad.

That washboard looks like the type caused by the synchronization of the "width of the cut" with the cutting speed. Next time you get this maybe try changing the cutting width by angling the mill in the cut and see if that reduces the washboard. You will have to do it by a significant amount, ie angle the mill to about 60º from the log compared to the usual 90º. If this works then a quick adjust fix could be adding a temporary stop to one of the mill rails to hold the mill at a specific angle during the cuts.

I notice you are using cross cutting top plate filing angles. but I found I can still make serious washboard with 10º ripping chain.

As far as the cutting angles go, my analysis is the left had side cutter is 3.01º and the right is 3.96º. Because an FOP generates an ~4.7º cutting angle I was surprised why they were so low, but seeing as the LP cutter is lower than cutters on regular chain this will explain the lower than usual angle. I assume you were using an FOP for a standard 3/8 chain?

This is an interesting trap for LP users but I can't see how using a standard FOP on LP chain will make a decent cutting angle. Maybe there an FOP for LP chain does exist, but direct measurement with a digital angle finder still seems like the only way to set the cutting angle for all cutter sizes.

You probably don't need any more cutting speed but you could certainly afford to increase the angle substantially especially given the size and softness of the wood you are cutting and the power of the saw you are using.

 

[mtngun]

Great pictures, Brad. That's some weird vibes going on in the cut. The chain must have hit some kind of resonant frequency in the narrow cut.

BobL will be along to analyze your chain and give us the official verdict , in the meantime, I'm going to say your top angle is about 15 degrees, not that there is anything wrong with that, and your rakers are not aggressive enough, according to my calibrated eyeball.

Edit: just read BobL's comment and realized the pic is LP, not the 3/8 that was used on the 084. Yes, there is an FOP for LP. I find the LP FOP is a little aggressive for my 066, so I only FOP it about every 3 or 4 sharpenings. Your mileage may vary.

 

[BobL]

BobL will be along to analyze your chain and give us the official verdict , in the meantime, I'm going to say your top angle is about 15 degrees, not that there is anything wrong with that, and your rakers are not aggressive enough, according to my calibrated eyeball.

The top cutter is 22º the other two are 20º

Edit: just read BobL's comment and realized the pic is LP, not the 3/8 that was used on the 084. Yes, there is an FOP for LP. I find the LP FOP is a little aggressive for my 066, so I only FOP it about every 3 or 4 sharpenings. Your mileage may vary.

Interesting - it would be interesting to see what that LP FOP generated cutting angle is.

 

[mtngun]

Interesting - it would be interesting to see what that LP FOP generated cutting angle is.

Hopefully, I'll have time to look into that this winter. Right now I'm busy building and cutting.

Then there is the .325 FOP, which is not nearly aggressive enough.

I've started to use my grinder to dress rakers, but the FOP may still be handy to set the first one. I guess once I figure out the ideal raker angle for the job at hand, I could use a caliper to dial in the first raker, then grind the rest ?

 

[Brmorgan]

OK you guys are both a bit confused, sorry if I was unclear somewhere. The pic is of the standard 3/8" .050 semichisel Oregon ripping chain I picked up at my local dealer and which is currently on the 084; I have pics of a couple LP chains elsewhere here but I can't remember what thread right now. Don't ask me what the chain's "model" code (lgx, rsc, wtf...) is either, because I can't keep all those numbers and letters straight in my head! I just define chains by their characteristics. Anyway for some reason I was thinking before that this chain was .063", but I had forgotten that this 25" Cannon roller-nose bar was in fact .050".

This chain started out at 10° and in two filings I took it back a little bit from that. It cut butter-smooth when I milled the big 24' beam for the shop back in the spring, so I took a few degrees off to try to make it a little more aggressive. Just by hand without any sort of guide, mind you, which explains the slight inconsistencies you measured. I was aiming for about 15° as mtngun guessed, but maybe I did take it a bit far. Still, I've milled with a full-chisel firewood chain at 30° before and gotten a much much smoother result than this nonsense.

As far as the difference in the rakers go from one side to the other, I did notice when taking the picture that when I held the ruler on cutters on the near side, the rakers on the far side appeared higher, but when I held the ruler across the far side cutters they looked the same. So I'm inclined to think it's largely just a matter of camera optics and depth perception, but as I said before, I did file the cutters freehand once since doing the rakers, and I'm not all that exacting about counting my strokes and everything, so I wouldn't be surprised if some cutters were different than others, regardless of the side.

All that notwithstanding, I'm more inclined to agree with Bob's assessment of it mostly being a harmonics issue related to the width of cut, number of cutters in the wood at a given time, and chain speed / RPM. I've found Doug Fir to be fairly forgiving when it comes to filing inconsistencies; heck, one of my 33" milling chains is missing two cutters and the top plates off two more (but I'll be damned if I didn't make it all the way through that 3/8" lag bolt!), and was assembled (not by me) with THREE cutters on the same side in a row where it was spliced. It doesn't cut as smooth as the LP chain (what does?) but would match the top cut in the first photo above. I would also agree that the rakers could still be taken down substantially for use with the 084. The rakers on the .404 milling chain for the 090 are down around .050" if I remember right!

As for FOPs, I have a .404, 3/8" standard full-chisel, 3/8" standard semi-chisel, and .325 chisel. I knew I was forgetting something in the order I just placed with Baileys - I had meant to add the LP to the roundup. I keep the FOPs on a paper binding ring (clips like the ones in 3-ring binders, but is just a single ring), which holds FOP collection to the lanyard hole in my wedge/tool pouch, so they go everywhere with me and are easy to keep together.

 

[mtngun]

Thanks for the explanation.

OK, if that is 3/8 chain for the 084, the raker angle sure looks wimpy to me. Not that it has anything to do with the washboard.

I wasn't even aware that there was a special FOP for semi-chisel. I've been using the 3/8 chisel FOP #37509 for all my 3/8 rakers. Wonder if it makes any difference ?

 

[BobL]

OK, if that is 3/8 chain for the 084, the raker angle sure looks wimpy to me. Not that it has anything to do with the washboard.

I m not so sure. If the washboard is a result of a synchronization between cutting speed and cut width, and since raker depths have a fair bit to do with cutting speed, then maybe they are related.

 

[Brmorgan]

Arggghhhh......

Well, yesterday I grabbed the remainder of the tree I took the 24' 8X12 out of back in the spring, and today I got 5 more logs from one that was already down in the bush nearby. It looked like it had been down a long time and I didn't think it was any good, but I bucked a couple lengths off and the heartwood is still solid enough to mill. Since the trailer was bearing the weight well so far, I decided to try three logs on it; it was doing just great until about halfway home, and then :censored: -

This seems to be a trend for me... But in its defense, it was clear the old weld had been half-cracked for quite some time since it was all rusted inside. I left the two larger logs right there and drug the small one home on the trailer on one wheel. Thankfully I only had to go a couple hundred yards; it left a real nice groove in the trail the whole way home. 40-odd minutes later it's all patched up and ready to go:

Not a real purty weld, but I used 6011 since it was so dirty and rusty and to get a bit better penetration. Sometime I'll grind it down and give it a better finish bead.

Here's the pile after today's hauling:

The five I brought back today are to the left of the big one on the bottom (you can just barely see the end of the small one). All in all I've brought home 20 logs counting the three already milled and the one on the supports ready to go. Since I already had the guide board and cut lines all set up on it (got rained out last night), I gave the chain on the 084 a touchup and then took a FOP to it at a more aggressive setting. Probably took .010 off of most of them. Here's what the top cut (~16" wide) looked:

The one possible downside of milling slightly green Douglas Fir; that pitch is just like tar and gums the chain up something terrible.

And here's the final 8" wide cut:

This time it was nice and smooth as it should be. Mind you, I was making sure to lean into the cut a bit harder than before, but I did let off a couple times to see what happened and it didn't seem to make it rougher. And who says Doug Fir doesn't have nice grain? I feel guilty using something like that for just a retaining wall. That isn't a crack either; it's a big mineral streak, which I think is from a fire the tree survived eons ago. Whether it'll split as it dries remains to be seen, but it sure looks neat right now.