cgraham
ArboristSite Lurker
The cutters on all 3 gauges, in each profile, are the same, in other words a cutter on a .325 chain in .050 is the same as one in .063. I would look at cutting as narrow a kerf as I could in that stuff, and with as short of a bar as I can get by with. IMHO, if you're staying with that size saw, 16" is ideal. I detest .325 chain, but run what you like in .050 if its handy.
Jeff: that's handy cutter info. I got my chains sorted out with a micrometer now, but I don't see the reason for 3 different guages in .325 (unless it's just "history"). It just seems to make life more complicated for manufacturer and consumer. Maybe there is a practical reason - I can't find it. Somebody here knows?
I agree the less kerf, the less sharpening. I don't really understand why wider kerfs are needed, unless on softwoods that swell when cut - but the chain is larger so what is the difference in clearance?
Why don't you like .325 compared with 3/8? I could have my saw set up as 3/8 if I had a good reason - but I'll get a wider kerf, and I'm left with good .325 chains.
A longer bar than my max 16" logs ensures that I get a full cut, and the extra length delays dulling very slightly. Any bar that projects uses very little energy. I use 18" (which will be driven by a 385xp - 3.7hp) - not enough length difference to argue about, plenty of power. You don't prefer to cut from both sides, do you? I don't know how much extra load is put on the saw and bar when the nose of the bar is buried, but the second cut is certainly easier.
My main objection to too long a bar on small work is that it is harder to stay clear of other logs, and danger of kickback from them is increased. Advantages (if you are a 1 saw man like me) - versatility, and greater reach.
Charlie
Last edited: