The making of a true "Woods Saw".

[ranger]

Hey everyone,

In my opinion of a "woods saw" it should have at least these three things. The saw should have big dawgs, a wrap handle and more power than stock. Alot of fallers like to ad a flap on the sprocket cover so you don't get showered with chips quite as bad. The bigger Dawgs and wrap handle are a must if you are doing alot of falling. Most of all we like more power!!! For most of us shade tree mechanics that means opening up the exhaust. Going further wood be a harder chore than we could handle, or is it. What do you think could be the next step in gaining more power out of our saws with limited tuning knowledge and what special tools are needed?

Matt

 

[Jacob J.]

<p>Howdy<p/>
<p>The True Woods Saw??<p/>
<p>I think that would depend a lot on what exactly it is in the woods you're doing. Rocky hit it on the nail, send your saw to a knowledgeable tuner. DozerDan, DozerDunn, or BullDozerGreffard to name three. They can tune a saw for a specified purpose, be it big timber, small timber, or arborist work. Big Dawgs and a Full wrap handle don't necessarily make a true woods saw. Some of my landing guys like a half wrap handle and small dawgs, because they're just limbing and bucking turns all day long. I have a cutting partner who prefers a half wrap handle for falling so he can make lower stumps.<p/>
<p>Big dawgs can be a detriment in smaller timber. Exhaust mods are illegal on a lot of federal and state timber sales, regardless of who you're working for. So are aftermarket air filters in limited cases. Another trick an old cutter showed me was to cut part of your sprocket cover away as to make putting your chain back on after you throw it much easier, as timber cutters here throw chains a few times a day. And for a guy who has to cut 300 or more sticks a day, they need all the tricks they can get.<p/>

 

[ranger]

Woods Saw

Jacob, I guess my post is headed in the wrong direction. I know how I like my woods saw and handfall 150-250 trees a day, the wrap handle is almost a must in certain situations. For some reason I very rarely throw a chain when falling, I suppose when walking out the tree to limb it they throw the chain. Exhaust mods haven't been a problem whether we are cutting on state land or BLM. I would like to be able to dive into the saw a little deaper myself, learn a bit more! Thanks for the input.

Matt

 

[JimL]

I am a fan of double dogs, one on the side cover and one of the saw, but they don't need to be great big.
I don't throw a chain very often. just when limbing or cutting brush.

 

[Ryan Willock]

on my woods saws I prefer memdium sized double dogs, a Tuned saw, flushcut handle bars (around here anyway) and a 24'' bar for most stuff.

 

[Jacob J.]

<p>Howdy<p/>
<p>In the lower 48, during fire season, you can be fined up to $10,000.00 for running an open exhaust. Same goes for no chaps or hardhat anytime of the year. Exhaust mods may fly in Alaska. As far as getting deeper into a saw, I agree 100%. Every timber faller, arborist, and firewood cutter should have a healthy understanding of what goes on inside and out of a saw.<p/>

 

[ranger]

open exhaust

Jacob, When I open up the muffler on my saws I make sure and put a spark screen on. Would that still be considered open even with a screen? I always wear a hardhat, chaps, goggles, and hearing protection, kinda feel naked without them. Also when running equipment I were a hardhat for those occasional jolts against the cab and defianately the seatbelt which is required. I have read where you guys log, you can get fined or fired if not using the proper notch. Some areas that is.

Matt

 

[JimL]

Yep i get checked all the time, Chaps, Hardhat, eye protection, and boots. They usually let the boot issue fly.

Only had my saws checked once.

 

[mikecross23]

Originally posted by JimL
Only had my saws checked once.

What was the out come of that?

 

[Jacob J.]

<p>Howdy<p/>
<p>The mufflers here have to appear stock. Here's what happens if a saw is found to be the catalyst for a forest fire on any federal or state land: One, if the saw is not burned up, it is retreived by law enforcement or arson investigators. Two- The saw is sent to an equipment examiner, for the feds on the west coast it's the forest service cache in Santa Rosa, Ca., Individual states have thier own offices for handling inspections. Three- If ANY changes have been made to the cylinder ( i.e.; exhaust port enlarged ) or muffler, even spark arrestors are in place, the operator or company can be found liable for all of the costs for fire suppression and loss, and any fines the investigating agency chooses to enforce. I know of one logging company personally that went broke after starting a fire on a timber sale on federal land, because they were using older saws that had the mufflers punched out but had a big piece of screen wired on around the openings.<p/>

 

[JimL]

Originally posted by mikecross23
What was the out come of that?

I run all my saws i cut timber with stock for now. He didn't check for screens, just looked for more holes.

 

[Jwoods]

Woods Saw

It's all in the name.

 

[tony marks]

my opinion is standard dawgs good sharp chain. most of all tho ,the saw needs to match the job. but the most important, is a the user knowing how to get the max ,outa his equipment.
the rest is just ,all in a days work.jmo

 

[ricksvar]

I agree,

There's a lot of good stock saws out there made by various companies.The saws power and bar lenght need to match the task.

It's the skill of the operator that will determine if the saw can be used producing best performance with little wear.After the ice storm here you could not walk out the door without hearing a saw.Most were under heavy load(rrrrrrrrrrr)and the operators did not maintain highest possible rpm(RRRRRR).Plenty of dull chains,not cutting,but gnawing thru wood.Pitiful pitiful pitiful!

What's the best woods saw?The one in the hands of a operator that knows what there doing.

Rick

 

[glens]

Jacob J.,

Got a handy reference to USC or their implementing CFR sections which pertain to the liability you speak of?&nbsp; I'm just wondering if the corollary to that line of thought is that the saw manufacturers are held liable if there were no modifications.&nbsp; If they are, then something's not right, and if they aren't then something's not right.

Glen

 

[leftey]

Hello,
I am new to this site. Can some one tell me who is Dozerdan & or Dennis?
What dose Dozerdan do to a saw ans how much dose it cost.
I'm thinking of having a saw worked over.
Looks like reading over this site it maybe the way to go.
Who should I send my 372xp to?
Thanks for any info anyone can give.

 

[mikecross23]

This is a little off topic, but I'm excited! I just opened up the muffler on my ms-460. Can't run it b/c it's late, but tomorrow. . .

Anyone use a Maxflow air filter kit? I see it listed in the 2003 Bailey's catalog on page 26 and was wondering how much difference the product would really make. Anyone? Anyone?

-Mike-

 

[Jacob J.]

<p>Howdy<p/>
<p>No Glens, the saw manufacturers aren't in line for being held liable at this time, that I'm aware of, if there's no modifications. Where I found these rules are straight out of OSHA guidelines and the Oregon Dept. of Foresty's regulations for forest practices. The OSHA inspectors remind us of this when they're out on a logging side checking us out. Basically, the operators and/or company are held liable for a forest fire started by any modified piece of equipment, which also includes shovels, skidders, processors, and blocks + rigging. I responded to a fire last year on company ground with my crew that was started by a rubber-tired log loader that had an open exhaust which pointed straight down to the ground. The fire was started in a fell and bucked unit, so the logger's insurance ate the burned up volume, fire suppression costs, and all the clean-up.<p/>
<p>Liability is applied sometimes in amazing ways though. Recently, a logger was falling trees on private property. One tree struck a power pole, which knocked electrical lines loose. The electrical lines came down, sparking a fire, and killing the logger in the process. After the fire was taken care of, the state held his widow responsible for all the suppression costs. She fought it in court and lost. Unfortunately, her husband neglected to get insurance before starting the logging job.<p/>