I just picked up one of these gadgets after hearing good things about the results from lowering rakers on the basis of the length of the cutter, rather than the "average" cutter height, a la Stihl depth gauge tool. But then I got to thinking, I don't run Carlton chain. How well does the File-O-Plate work with the geometry of 33RS and 73LG? Thanks in advance.
Carlton File-O-Plate for Raker Maintenance
- Thread starter CMBetz
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Dave
ArboristSite Guru
I use it on Oregon and Bailey's and it works pretty slick. Wouldn't be without one now.
wendell hollis
ArboristSite Member
Hi Christian, As a well known how to do it lady on T.V. would say, It's a good thing!! Used one for several years. Pretty spiffy. 
Walt Galer
ArboristSite Operative
Howdy,
Of course Carlton does not recommend the use of their fil-o-plate on other brands, due to possible misfit caused liability problems, etc.
In fact I have used it on both RS and LG quite successfully. You need to be aware that the kickback potential and energy will increase as the cutter is maintained back.
The idea of progressively lowering the depthgauge in an even manner as the cutter filed back, used to be well known in the industry, but has largely been forgotten. The problem with kickback pretty much assures that it will not be much promoted in the future. The basic idea is to counter-act the fact that as the cutter's cutting edge gets further away from the following edge of the depthgauge, the angle of presentation to the wood vs. the part bottom and/or pitch centerline of the rivets, changes reducing the bite at a given depthgauge setting as measured locating off of the part bottom and measuring from the cutting edge to the depthgauge (which is what all other tools on the market do). Bottomwear makes the situation even worse. You have to think about this one a while!
Sandvik experiemented with a progressive lowering tool attached to a roller fileguide, and I believe they had this thing on the market for a short while. I would assume it is history now. The part that you used to lower the depthgauges, looked exactly like a piece of a Carlton File-o-plate!
The increase in bite, together with the greater cutting face distance back behind the depthgauge is why the kickback potential increases, rather profoundly.
Regards,
Walt Galer
Of course Carlton does not recommend the use of their fil-o-plate on other brands, due to possible misfit caused liability problems, etc.
In fact I have used it on both RS and LG quite successfully. You need to be aware that the kickback potential and energy will increase as the cutter is maintained back.
The idea of progressively lowering the depthgauge in an even manner as the cutter filed back, used to be well known in the industry, but has largely been forgotten. The problem with kickback pretty much assures that it will not be much promoted in the future. The basic idea is to counter-act the fact that as the cutter's cutting edge gets further away from the following edge of the depthgauge, the angle of presentation to the wood vs. the part bottom and/or pitch centerline of the rivets, changes reducing the bite at a given depthgauge setting as measured locating off of the part bottom and measuring from the cutting edge to the depthgauge (which is what all other tools on the market do). Bottomwear makes the situation even worse. You have to think about this one a while!
Sandvik experiemented with a progressive lowering tool attached to a roller fileguide, and I believe they had this thing on the market for a short while. I would assume it is history now. The part that you used to lower the depthgauges, looked exactly like a piece of a Carlton File-o-plate!
The increase in bite, together with the greater cutting face distance back behind the depthgauge is why the kickback potential increases, rather profoundly.
Regards,
Walt Galer
Dave
ArboristSite Guru
Hey Wendell, if you want to get some fast and free horsepower out of your 2065 use a pair of needle nose pliers to unflatten the top of the exhaust port. I couldn't believe what a difference a five second modification made 
It appears that Husqvarna also makes a similar depth gauge tool, that measures the raker height in relation to the cutter length. It has two gauges on opposite sides of a piece of flat stock, one for hardwoods and the other for softwoods. Any experience with one of these?
Walt Galer
ArboristSite Operative
Howdy,
One more thing I should mention probably is the amount of depthgauge setting that you get at the end of life with the File-o-plate method. With Carlton's own chisel chain, this amounts just over .030, but with LG or RS chain, the setting gets to be a bit more. I measure .035 or even a hair greater. I assume this is because of the longer cutter topplate, and the resulting greater distance back from the back of the depthgauge on these chains. .035 is getting to be a rather heavy setting on chisel chain for the average Joe firewood cutter.
At the end of life of the cutter, the kickback increases rather alarmingly-even at .030 depthgauge setting right at the last little bit of the cutter life. This is because the guardlink function of the ramped depthgauge design becomes much less effective, due to the space between the cutting edge and the depthgauge. There is room to grab something much more than on a new cutter, where it is difficult to get something in there.
Because of this end of life situation, I would not care to recommend the file-o-plate for setting depthgauges on RS or LG model sawchains, at least for the average person.
Regards,
Walt Galer
One more thing I should mention probably is the amount of depthgauge setting that you get at the end of life with the File-o-plate method. With Carlton's own chisel chain, this amounts just over .030, but with LG or RS chain, the setting gets to be a bit more. I measure .035 or even a hair greater. I assume this is because of the longer cutter topplate, and the resulting greater distance back from the back of the depthgauge on these chains. .035 is getting to be a rather heavy setting on chisel chain for the average Joe firewood cutter.
At the end of life of the cutter, the kickback increases rather alarmingly-even at .030 depthgauge setting right at the last little bit of the cutter life. This is because the guardlink function of the ramped depthgauge design becomes much less effective, due to the space between the cutting edge and the depthgauge. There is room to grab something much more than on a new cutter, where it is difficult to get something in there.
Because of this end of life situation, I would not care to recommend the file-o-plate for setting depthgauges on RS or LG model sawchains, at least for the average person.
Regards,
Walt Galer
Gypo Logger
Timber Baron
Hi Walt, I have noticed that RS wont cut as well as it did when prior to filing the cutters back 60%, in conjuction with the file-o-plate. Could this be the result of the lower raker? I have also noticed that a chain developes no noticeable stretching after a time if all other factors are looked after. I have also noticed that 60 drivers of new RS is longer than 60 drivers of LG.
I saw for the first time that I was using a GB sprocket and was very impressed with the lack of wear which appeared to be very uniform around its circumferance.
Pictured below is the sprocket and chain that ran at least 30 tanks of fuel, but I did use mostly 10w-40 engine oil as bar lube.
I did the math and grossed approx. 200$/tank of fuel, so I think I got alot of use from these parts.
The One Day Millionaire
I saw for the first time that I was using a GB sprocket and was very impressed with the lack of wear which appeared to be very uniform around its circumferance.
Pictured below is the sprocket and chain that ran at least 30 tanks of fuel, but I did use mostly 10w-40 engine oil as bar lube.
I did the math and grossed approx. 200$/tank of fuel, so I think I got alot of use from these parts.
The One Day Millionaire
Walt Galer
ArboristSite Operative
Howdy,
The Stihl RS chain has a unique problem that becomes increasingly a factor as the cutter is filed back toward end of life. The cutter seems to have been designed to fit a 5mm file instead of a 7/32, and also seems to have less of a topplate compensating angle designed into it. That is the angle of the topplate as it reaches across the kerf. Most chains are designed with the overthrown edge up a might, so as you file at a topplate filing angle, the resulting cutting edge is setting square with the kerf bottom. (due to the relationship with the topplate relief angle).
This down at the overthrown edge condition on the RS makes the chain increasingly difficult to file to optimum performance as you file back without cutting the heck out of the tiestrap on the opposite side and the drivelink. If you change to a 13/64 file (5mm - as recommended) you will find that you will actually get a bit of the performance back, but still not what it was new.
I believe the Stihl chain is slightly longer because of the "prestretching" that is done after assembly on the assembly machine. The chain comes off of assembly section of the machine, and over some rollers that physically pull the chain to stretch the rivets into a seat in the direction the chain will be run. This lengthens the chain by a minute amount at each rivet, and this adds up over several drivelinks to probably what you have observed.
Regards,
Walt Galer
The Stihl RS chain has a unique problem that becomes increasingly a factor as the cutter is filed back toward end of life. The cutter seems to have been designed to fit a 5mm file instead of a 7/32, and also seems to have less of a topplate compensating angle designed into it. That is the angle of the topplate as it reaches across the kerf. Most chains are designed with the overthrown edge up a might, so as you file at a topplate filing angle, the resulting cutting edge is setting square with the kerf bottom. (due to the relationship with the topplate relief angle).
This down at the overthrown edge condition on the RS makes the chain increasingly difficult to file to optimum performance as you file back without cutting the heck out of the tiestrap on the opposite side and the drivelink. If you change to a 13/64 file (5mm - as recommended) you will find that you will actually get a bit of the performance back, but still not what it was new.
I believe the Stihl chain is slightly longer because of the "prestretching" that is done after assembly on the assembly machine. The chain comes off of assembly section of the machine, and over some rollers that physically pull the chain to stretch the rivets into a seat in the direction the chain will be run. This lengthens the chain by a minute amount at each rivet, and this adds up over several drivelinks to probably what you have observed.
Regards,
Walt Galer
jokers
Addicted to ArboristSite
Husky Depth Guage Tools
These are the Husky versions of depth guage lowering tools. They are made specifically for the geometry of the LG style chains, but I have had good results with the occasional Stihl chain that I run. The top tool is for .325 pitch, and the tool to the right is a roller file guide for the .325. The bottom tools are for 3/8.Russ
These are the Husky versions of depth guage lowering tools. They are made specifically for the geometry of the LG style chains, but I have had good results with the occasional Stihl chain that I run. The top tool is for .325 pitch, and the tool to the right is a roller file guide for the .325. The bottom tools are for 3/8.Russ
Kevin
Addicted to ArboristSite
Rubicon,
This is what it looks like ...
This is what it looks like ...
Walt Galer
ArboristSite Operative
Howdy,
The Husky filing tools pictured above are the type that has been in use in Sweden for some years. They work OK, but I have found that the current models as pictured, leave too blunt of a sideplate cutting angle (The angle inside the sideplate that shears the endgrain of the wood). This works great in frozen wood, but costs a performance penalty in normal softwood of any significant diameter, as compared to a filing at 30 degree topplate and 15 degree hook (for LG chain). Also, the swedish tool just guides the file by the rollers, which give no control over actually holding the topplate filing angle. You just have to go by angle on the tool under the file. Most people can't see this that well.
I believe that this situation resulted from the recent period of time, when Oregon recommended a 20 degree topplate. This proved to be a mistake, and I understand that they are now going back to 30 degrees. I have yet to see a new filing instruction to confirm, so we'll see.
Regards,
Walt Galer
The Husky filing tools pictured above are the type that has been in use in Sweden for some years. They work OK, but I have found that the current models as pictured, leave too blunt of a sideplate cutting angle (The angle inside the sideplate that shears the endgrain of the wood). This works great in frozen wood, but costs a performance penalty in normal softwood of any significant diameter, as compared to a filing at 30 degree topplate and 15 degree hook (for LG chain). Also, the swedish tool just guides the file by the rollers, which give no control over actually holding the topplate filing angle. You just have to go by angle on the tool under the file. Most people can't see this that well.
I believe that this situation resulted from the recent period of time, when Oregon recommended a 20 degree topplate. This proved to be a mistake, and I understand that they are now going back to 30 degrees. I have yet to see a new filing instruction to confirm, so we'll see.
Regards,
Walt Galer
Wow, thanks for all the info guys. Gives me something to think about. One problem I have been getting is that the chrome on the side of the cutter seems to be leaving a noticeable ridge after I'm done. Same with the top of the cutter. What am I doing wrong?
jokers
Addicted to ArboristSite
I have to agree with Walt that the roller gives you no control over the top plate angle, but I fail to see where the File-O-Plate does either. The F-O-P is an ingenious tool but there are alternatives, and I`ve shown a few that work. The roller guide will help you achieve a consistant 10 degree downangle on the file and it does help you maintain the correct file height. Everyone truly needs a reliable way of lowering depth guages properly, but the truth is that hardly any accomplished cutter of any sort that I know of uses a file guide. I think some are very good for the beginning cutter to have as a safety net so to speak, while they teach their muscles the angles and technique of filing. I don`t want Walt or anyone else to take offense, but I`ve got to say that improper chainsaw use leads to far more kickback potential and accidents than raker tools that aren`t truly progressive or 100% accurate. I think it`s a fact that kickback potential increases with each sharpening, so what should we do, only use new chains? Endless talk about the minor shortcomings of the various guages amounts to semantics when you enter the real world of an almost infinite amount of variables. I know that there may many cutters here who primarily cut softwoods, so specifically pointing out the short comings of a tool for their use is valid. Many of us however, rarely if ever, taint our chains with that pitch fouled stuff, and we are interested in what works in hardwood. Take a look at the pic I have attached. It shows the roller on some 34LG. Not for everybody, but works for some. Russ
Art Martin
ArboristSite Operative
Again, there seems to be a lot of confusion about the raker depth. Many people do not understand the progressive method of lowering the depth gauges. Assume that the chain leaves the factory at .025". As the cutters are filed back, each sharpening causes the height of the cutting edge to diminish in relation to the depth gauge. If this process is allowed to continue without reducing the depth gauge, the height of the cutter will be the same height as the depth gauge. The cutter will not bite into the wood and the chain would stop cutting. In order to keep the chain cutting properly, the depth gauges must be lowered. How much? You would logically think to the same height as when it left the factory. If you do this, the chain will not cut as fast. Due to the change in the top plate clearance angle. The progressive method, which was developed by the maker of the File-O-Plate, will cause the chain to cut with the same efficiency each time it is filed back. The design of the File-O-Plate is such that it will cause the chain to maintain original cutting efficiency throughout its entire life. A 3/8" pitch chain that is filed back to over the rear rivet, the depth of the depth gauge should be .038" to be equivalent to the .025" that it was when it left the factory. This is why .038" sounds like too much but it isn't for the professional timbercutter or Joe Woodcutter.
Art Martin
Art Martin
Gypo Logger
Timber Baron
Hi There, one thing we all know for sure is that no two individuals file alike or produce the same results, however, the universal trick to successful filing is to have all cutters and rakers exact regardless of style or tool used.
When I start out with a new chain I always use a 13/64" round file to crispen up the top plate and side plate. I always file every tank cause the chain usually needs tensioning anyway and it takes me longer to fill the fuel tank of the saw than it does to file a wood dull chain. After a few filings I begin to change my technique and may angle the file up or down 25 degrees or more to clean out the gullet. It is hard to describe but I apply various pressures and angles according to what I feel the cutter needs, but regardless of what I do, I make sure all cutters are very close to identical. Sometimes I will even take a square file or flat file to the cutters in round file fashion. I dont know why, but I cant bring myself to allow the file to touch the side straps, however this mental block may change as I try to get more cutability out of my chains. As far as production logging is concerned or just plain firewooding I cant complain about how the wood chips fly as long as I can sever wood fibre faster than a large tree can fall. I dont think I have ever used a chain up more than 50% untill last week, but I can still learn I guess how to make it cut as well as the first 50%.
I have noted that the 404 file-o-plate has two raker slots (four for left and right), that give two different raker heights, although I havent tried it yet on my used 3/8 I will.
John
When I start out with a new chain I always use a 13/64" round file to crispen up the top plate and side plate. I always file every tank cause the chain usually needs tensioning anyway and it takes me longer to fill the fuel tank of the saw than it does to file a wood dull chain. After a few filings I begin to change my technique and may angle the file up or down 25 degrees or more to clean out the gullet. It is hard to describe but I apply various pressures and angles according to what I feel the cutter needs, but regardless of what I do, I make sure all cutters are very close to identical. Sometimes I will even take a square file or flat file to the cutters in round file fashion. I dont know why, but I cant bring myself to allow the file to touch the side straps, however this mental block may change as I try to get more cutability out of my chains. As far as production logging is concerned or just plain firewooding I cant complain about how the wood chips fly as long as I can sever wood fibre faster than a large tree can fall. I dont think I have ever used a chain up more than 50% untill last week, but I can still learn I guess how to make it cut as well as the first 50%.
I have noted that the 404 file-o-plate has two raker slots (four for left and right), that give two different raker heights, although I havent tried it yet on my used 3/8 I will.
John
Gypo Logger
Timber Baron
What a difference a day makes! Now I am a total convert.
20 thou rakers or less on a square ground 35RS or 73LG. Of course, I came up with this information all on my own.
Now We're Loggin'.
John
20 thou rakers or less on a square ground 35RS or 73LG. Of course, I came up with this information all on my own.
Now We're Loggin'.
John
