chain saws for milling. Why CC and not HP?

[Joseph Acquisto]

Been mulling over going for a chain saw mill and see most, if not all, specify the CC of the saw and not the HP.

Wondering why? Just a give that saws of such and so CC should have the snot needed?

 

[Lightning Performance]

Longer stroke cranks to pull more cutters is the simple answer.

 

[Lightning Performance]

Been mulling over going for a chain saw mill and see most, if not all, specify the CC of the saw and not the HP.

Wondering why? Just a give that saws of such and so CC should have the snot needed?

Examples:
42mm stroke 50 or 52mm bore
37.5mm stroke 56mm bore.
43 or 44 mm is where long bars work very well on basic factory applications.
Big difference between them. Rated at about the same output by real users. Completely different attitudes. 40×52 is only 85cc and very common or it was for decades from many manufacturers. 38×56 runs completely different.

 

[sean donato]

Bigger saws A take the abuse better, and B more cc = more power/torque. Like lightning said, it's about having the torque to drag all those cutters around the bar in about the most demanding way you can use a saw.

 

[ballisticdoughnut]

Horsepower isn’t necessarily what you should be looking at for a milling saw. Torque is what you want, more displacement equals more power across the board. For milling more torque is more better.

 

[Lightning Performance]

The guy is in NY so finding something like a 285CD or bigger should be doable. The oil pumps are the best part and clutches.

 

[stihltech]

You don't want a high revving Chevy small block for milling. You want the lower revving blig block out of a dump truck. Torque is what you want.

 

[Martin saw it!]

I use a 3120xp on an Alaskan. I disagree with some points made. You cannot rationally equate a saws piston diameter or stroke to it's suitability for milling. The 3120 weighs in at 10 kg before you put a bar on it. It's the saw I bought and I regret it. Too old a design, too heavy, not enough gain in any sense over some other saws. There are other factors at play; saw maintenance and servicing, what you intend to cut, how brutal you are with your machinery etc. Manufacturers tend to have little to say about the torque of their saws. The reason for this is that is of little importance compared to other factors; chainspeed against power against weight etc. I hope to finish this soon but take you're pick here, 1957 Remington logmaster, 106cc or a new Stihl MS661.

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

Manufacturers tend to have little to say about the torque of their saws.

Mostly because torque has traditionally only mattered to logging big trees and milling, and sales for both are a tiny blip of modern chainsaw sales. I felt the same way as you about my 121cc Stihl behemoth for a long time - wished I'd gotten a MS660 instead. But what I've come to appreciate is it's never been taxed whatsoever by any of its use and continues to start first or second pull after five years with next to no maintenance. Make money renting it out to a tree service friend on occasion now for cutting up big rounds for disposal quicker.

But yeah, if I was only going to get one saw for milling and the majority of what I milled was under 36" - which is true for most people - it probably wouldn't be the big beast. The very American "there's no replacement for displacement" saying reflects the general bigger is better about everything here. There is a replacement - more efficient cutting at higher speeds that requires much less power. Variety of chain solutions for that and custom chain grinds, but very few people bother with that and just use standard inefficient chain and a bigger saw. Logosol Europe is one of the only companies that has advanced chainsaw milling in the past decade to be a lot more efficient, but Logosol US doesn't sell any of their advanced products.

 

[cscltd]

As they use to say- there is no replacement for displacement !
A few of the guys I sold ms661 for milling have always said it’s ok, but wish it had more, but the guys that bought 3120 or ms880 have never complained about power, just weight and small gas tank
so it’s which you rather have or not have

 

[lone wolf]

Been mulling over going for a chain saw mill and see most, if not all, specify the CC of the saw and not the HP.

Wondering why? Just a give that saws of such and so CC should have the snot needed?

Why a Tractor on a farm for work and not a corvette!

 

[lone wolf]

Get an 880 Magnum then.

 

[Lightning Performance]

I use a 3120xp on an Alaskan. I disagree with some points made. You cannot rationally equate a saws piston diameter or stroke to it's suitability for milling. The 3120 weighs in at 10 kg before you put a bar on it. It's the saw I bought and I regret it. Too old a design, too heavy, not enough gain in any sense over some other saws. There are other factors at play; saw maintenance and servicing, what you intend to cut, how brutal you are with your machinery etc. Manufacturers tend to have little to say about the torque of their saws. The reason for this is that is of little importance compared to other factors; chainspeed against power against weight etc. I hope to finish this soon but take you're pick here, 1957 Remington logmaster, 106cc or a new Stihl MS661.

3120 is pig in stock form just like 1124s and has too many factory built-in issues for me to own one. The the air filter leaks and the tank vents. The parts are extremely expensive compared to other saws in the Husky line. It weighs a ton and then some. The sleaved parts ain't my thing. It maybe good for milling once fixed.

One of my close acquaintances had one. I never seen or ran it but he sold it from the dusty place it was laying. Terry Landrum 3120 ported and as he described it a big pita tool. He said it was too heavy, still didn't have enough good mid range power ported and sucked to get going. Sounds like something I don't need. I've done several saws for him and he is still grinning about them. 50cc 60cc and 70cc is next. He runs a stock 118cc saw of another mother and tells me he loves it and wants the newer OEM sister juiced up also. I think the 3120 is just not the thing to have unless your going all in. Ported for long bars not two foot bars and setup for milling. Better muffler or pipe header. Better air filter and machine work. Still going to be a concrete block.

 

[Lightning Performance]

Get an 880 Magnum then.

Don't do that.
Get the new 881 or the old style 088 or very early 880 with the bigger carb. I'm sticking with the old junky 084s