CSM Build Question

[Circle B MN]

I was on another site and found some pics of a four post mill like what you would associate with a band saw mill, but it was actually using a bar and chain powered by a lawn mower style engine. Looks like it could be interesting to build. Any information around these parts regarding this type of setup..? I like to think I am a pretty good fabricator, I have a good bit of material already, and my initial thought is that I could hobby mill inexpensively without putting a lot of wear and tear on my saws. Your comments and suggestions are welcomed..

 

[mtngun]

If I were going to fab a mill, which I keep saying I'm going to do one of these years, I'd build a bandmill, not a chainsaw mill. The bandmill will cut faster and use less fuel. It costs a little more, since you have to buy the wheels and buy or make the guides, but otherwise it isn't that much more work. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Circle B MN]

I have never owned nor operated either, so I am here for input. The build part either way is not too big a deal for me. I've built a lot of stuff in my day and with a lil head scratch'n and a curse or two it all works out. At this point I would like to think a chain would be easier to service and maintain than a band. It is for hobby, and I have the means to sharpen chain already. I don't know where I would go local to get a bandsaw blade or to have one sharpened.

Go easy on me, I'm new...

 

[mtngun]

chain would be easier to service and maintain than a band. It is for hobby, and I have the means to sharpen chain already. I don't know where I would go local to get a bandsaw blade or to have one sharpened.

True, but there is no comparison in the cutting speed of a band vs. a chain.

Some of the bandmill guys will eventually chime in, but several places sell blades online, and you'll probably end up shipping your blades to be sharpened, at least in the beginning. There are lots of places that resharpen them, just a question of finding the place nearest you to minimize shipping cost.

 

[Circle B MN]

True, but there is no comparison in the cutting speed of a band vs. a chain.

Some of the bandmill guys will eventually chime in, but several places sell blades online, and you'll probably end up shipping your blades to be sharpened, at least in the beginning. There are lots of places that resharpen them, just a question of finding the place nearest you to minimize shipping cost.

I will certainly take that into account, and I do appreciate you entertaining my question.

As for the speed of cut, I have more time than money at the moment.. I have pawed enough Woodmizer catalogs to know what I would really like, but things back here on planet reality are a bit different.

 

[BobL]

I agree with Mtngun. I was thinking of turning the CS mill I have just finished building into a 4 poster rail mill but if I ever get enough space the next mill I build will be a band mill.

 

[gemniii]

Google ProCut and search here.

If you want to go CSM 4 post on rail one advantage would be if you've got big trees and want wide slabs.

A BSM w/ a 60" cut is EXPENSIVE. a CSM w/ a 60" cut is expensive but doable.

 

[Circle B MN]

Google ProCut and search here.

If you want to go CSM 4 post on rail one advantage would be if you've got big trees and want wide slabs.

A BSM w/ a 60" cut is EXPENSIVE. a CSM w/ a 60" cut is expensive but doable.

Thanks for the link. That is certainly the design I had in mind, other than remove the Stihl and replace it with a bar and chain powered by perhaps a 10Hp Briggs & Straton or the likes(ie. air cooled 4-stroke). The bar would be mounted in the carriage with a two bolt method, the engine fixed to the carriage as well. Couple different options for tensioning the chain and oiling. I'll have to do some more head scratch'n, but RPM's may be an issue..?

 

[BobL]

How long a bar are you thinking?

 

[mtngun]

replace it with a bar and chain powered by perhaps a 10Hp Briggs & Straton or the likes(ie. air cooled 4-stroke). The bar would be mounted in the carriage with a two bolt method, the engine fixed to the carriage as well.

Someone has posted a similar design on this forum. Don't remember his name so I don't know how to find the thread. He was happy with the results.

You don't have to duplicate chainsaw RPM's. Instead, use more aggressive rakers and perhaps skip chain to take bigger bites.

 

[Circle B MN]

How long a bar are you thinking?

I would imagine a 36"...? Reason being, that I already have one. After mounting, that would perhaps leave me with 30" or so capacity...?

 

[Circle B MN]

Another thought...what if the mill was made so that the power head could be swapped out with a fair bit of ease, and an electric motor replaced the gas.? Here in MN it would sure be nice to mill inside my heated 30x40 during the winter. What size electric would you image would be needed.? 220 1-Phase of course.

 

[BobL]

I would imagine a 36"...? Reason being, that I already have one. After mounting, that would perhaps leave me with 30" or so capacity...?

That should be OK. The reason I ask is because if you wanted to go to say 60" then 10 HP on a four stroke would not be enough. The Lucas slabber setups start at 16 HP .

It's a pity you already have a bar because one way to get more chain speed is to use a bigger (say 13 pin) drive sprocket but these do not work so well with conventional chain saw bars so using a harvester bar which holds the chain on.

 

[Circle B MN]

That should be OK. The reason I ask is because if you wanted to go to say 60" then 10 HP on a four stroke would not be enough. The Lucas slabber setups start at 16 HP .

It's a pity you already have a bar because one way to get more chain speed is to use a bigger (say 13 pin) drive sprocket but these do not work so well with conventional chain saw bars so using a harvester bar which holds the chain on.

Good point Bob.. The mill I saw was using a harvester bar. Guess there is a reason for it. Thanks....


ETA...Looks like Baileys has a 100cm / 39.4in harvester bar for $95.. .404 pitch. That is a bit of wood turned to dust...

 

[BobL]

Another thought...what if the mill was made so that the power head could be swapped out with a fair bit of ease, and an electric motor replaced the gas.? Here in MN it would sure be nice to mill inside my heated 30x40 during the winter. What size electric would you image would be needed.? 220 1-Phase of course.

You'd need 3 phase power. Electric has to be at least as many HP - preferably more. The base model electric Lucas mills are 15 HP 3 Phase.

 

[gemniii]

If you LIMIT yourself to using the 36" bar a BSM would do better, much smaller kerf, plenty of sources for blades etc.
If you somehow make it adjustable for BIG wood, and may have a source of big wood a CSM wood Stihl make sense.

Are you trying to design any portability into the creature?

And as far as harvester bar pitch - It's not the pitch (a measurement of link spacing)

, it's more the gauge and the width of the tooth that determines kerf.

Some harvester chain is 0.122, compared to 0.063 you'd normally use on a long chainsaw bar, or the 0.050 you might use on a 36" bar.

 

[Circle B MN]

If you LIMIT yourself to using the 36" bar a BSM would do better, much smaller kerf, plenty of sources for blades etc.
If you somehow make it adjustable for BIG wood, and may have a source of big wood a CSM wood Stihl make sense.

Are you trying to design any portability into the creature?

And as far as harvester bar pitch - It's not the pitch (a measurement of link spacing)

, it's more the gauge and the width of the tooth that determines kerf.

Some harvester chain is 0.122, compared to 0.063 you'd normally use on a long chainsaw bar, or the 0.050 you might use on a 36" bar.

Thanks for the input, as well as the idea. What if you used a cantilever design similiar to the newer Woodmizers..? A telescoping boom would allow longer bars if needed. That concept could perhaps be out of the realm of hobby milling in my case...

 

[gemniii]

And before anyone flames me - most chain for chainsaw in the 0.050. 0.063 gauge has the same cutter width, just different tang width. And I'm just ASSuming that harvester with a 0.122 tang width has a wider kerf.

I did find one reference saying Carlton did it differently, but that was real old.