Frank Savage
ArboristSite Operative
Some tech info on the beggining (almost the same saw as Husqvarna 40-the new plastic one):
Displacement 2,43 cu. in./40,3 cm3
Bore 1,57“/40 mm
Stroke 1,26“/32 mm
Power 2,0 kW at 9000 rpm
Recommended max. speed, no load 12 500 rpm
Max torque unknown for me, if you know, please refer
recommended bar 13“-18“, chain pitch 325, drive link 0,050-0,058 free to choose, 7t drive sprocket
I have now this little Jonsy as my only saw on hand. Why, it´s a longer story. But certainly, I have some experience in 404 and some 3/8 world cutting hardwoods, both semi- and full-chisel, and a quite a lot of experience with using my elbow grease with blades to 5,5´.
I´ll have to use it this winter even where I would like to normally use sth. like 460/660/Dolmar 7900-felling and cutting firewood in some oak, a bit of elm or larch and mostly black locust so dense that air-dry wood from some snags barely floats. Anything between 4“ and 30-34“ DBH, most 12-20“, most are nasty leaners on a rocky 45-60deg. slope-a lot of 25-30“ on it´s base part as uprooted.
Also, I´ll be probably helping to friend of mine in cleaning some rock climbing corridors this winter/spring, where is impossible to use a big saw.
So I have to solve a „reach vs. power“ problem. The standard 15“/0,058“ bar, 64 link full-comp in 325 on 7t sprocket is ready and obvious, but useless for a lot of the trees, so as the longest recomended 18“ bar.
With some of the trees, there is no „acceptably unsafe“ way to stand and cut on both sides, so I´ll have to cut it from one side all. Also, I´m looking for some bucking comfort for anything dia above that 13,5“ of useful bar lenght.
The amount of wood necessary to cut is not great, also I´m not pressed much by time-effectivenes and I like to play
. For sure, I´ll have to use the same techniques as if using a 36“ bar in 4,5´ wood. Using a 4,5 kW saw with 404 in above listed fat stuff shall be quite well dynamically resembling to a 20“ bar with 325 on my 2 kW saw.
And here I need some input and discussion of my thoughs, since 325 is new to me and real world is much more geen and blue than grey theory and „snack-sack“ maths:
Simple and obvious idea is to use a 20“ bar (probably the longest I can get here)-no big deal in larch or even some of the oak when sharpening to a tad of self-feed and driving the saw light-handed. But with the locust I´m pretty suspicious, since the wood is pretty strong and stark.
I´ve learned rhe hard way, that there´s mostly no big deal to cut the chips even with a long, burried saw in no-matter-how-hard-wood, but most of the fun is to pry them out from the cut. That little bastards are pressing and squeezing themselves wherever they can to be cut in two once again, be overrided by the cutter twice again, to be rolled, pressed and stored in the cut, thus preventing the cutter effectively to reach the intact wood, and be bent and pushed hard by the chain or blade, instead of flowing nicely under the cutting plate and generaly doing whatever they can to eat any power in the vicinity. This started me to make my own sawblades for my 40“ bucksaw and using a 404 on a chainsaw. Both maybe sometimes slower than „standardly adopted technologies“, but if properly set for the job, much less power demanding on the final bill.
So, 325 full-comp is pretty „dense“ chain with not-so-much volume for chips, at least as it seems to me and my measurements. Grinding away 1/3 of teeth making a 2/3 comp semi-skip (L-R-L-R-_-_-L-R-L-R-_-_-L) or half the teeth, creating five full-skip (L-R-_-_-L-R-_-_-L-R-_-_-L) seems to me be very helpful. Also in terms of number of teeth „in charge“, which is on full-skip even lower than on burried 15“ full-comp armed bar (no problem for the saw, but no heavy leaning on it is aplicable in the locust).
Also I think here about grinding the rakers not to recomended 0,025“, but just sth like 0,020“ or even less and using a 8t drive sprocket, which in my opinion should not load the engine too much by chip thickness and so improve the efectiveness by the matter of chain speed, since any little engine is much stronger in terms of power in revs, than in terms of torque. It worked for me on 404, but you can park an airship into that chain, compared to the 325.
I know for sure that everything mentioned WILL work SOMEHOW. I´m trying to figure out the most efficient, fastest and thus safest combo (of all that ineficient weird ideas, if you relly on manuals). Because some trees must have cuts been done before they even realize it and before gravitation starts thinking about doing it´s part of the job-I think most of you knows this better than me.
Few weeks ago I saw in action a beated stock Stihl 270 with 24 or 25“ bar and 3/8 low profile full-chisel, making it´s way through bucking a 32“x36“ black locust, uprooted in park. No competition speed of course, but surprisingly decent working speed as the operator was really not a former or actual feller-by the overall habits and being incapable of proper leveling two perpendicular cuts into each other, so he alwyas had to bore and ream a bit to side to hit the previous cut on the oposite part of the trunk. The cuts were between 45 (in part with heart root) and 78-80 (in healty part) seconds, always including needed reaming and care for not hitting the concrete underneath.
That´s quite acceptable speed for my purposes, since I know I´ll have to use bore cuts quite frequently to have the hinge properly finished and then releasing the tree or buck by cutting just the holding strap or post. So, since the 270 has 2,6 kW, I asume that my 2041 with 20“ bar in 325 with proper raker settings and chain mods shall be right on par (if not better) with that full-comp 3/8 low-pro on 24“.
(Except of „use bigger saw, madman“, which is obvious and impossible for now)
By Your experience, which way would you go?
Can be a full-comp chain with about ,020-,015“ or a bit less raker clearance used efectively on a 20“ bar (compared to skip chains there or full-comp on 15“ bar) without overloading the saw? (Seems improbable to me, but no added price for the question here-at least I hope so )
Are there any other possible solutions, playing the chain and sprocket altering game I missed somehow?
Displacement 2,43 cu. in./40,3 cm3
Bore 1,57“/40 mm
Stroke 1,26“/32 mm
Power 2,0 kW at 9000 rpm
Recommended max. speed, no load 12 500 rpm
Max torque unknown for me, if you know, please refer
recommended bar 13“-18“, chain pitch 325, drive link 0,050-0,058 free to choose, 7t drive sprocket
I have now this little Jonsy as my only saw on hand. Why, it´s a longer story. But certainly, I have some experience in 404 and some 3/8 world cutting hardwoods, both semi- and full-chisel, and a quite a lot of experience with using my elbow grease with blades to 5,5´.
I´ll have to use it this winter even where I would like to normally use sth. like 460/660/Dolmar 7900-felling and cutting firewood in some oak, a bit of elm or larch and mostly black locust so dense that air-dry wood from some snags barely floats. Anything between 4“ and 30-34“ DBH, most 12-20“, most are nasty leaners on a rocky 45-60deg. slope-a lot of 25-30“ on it´s base part as uprooted.
Also, I´ll be probably helping to friend of mine in cleaning some rock climbing corridors this winter/spring, where is impossible to use a big saw.
So I have to solve a „reach vs. power“ problem. The standard 15“/0,058“ bar, 64 link full-comp in 325 on 7t sprocket is ready and obvious, but useless for a lot of the trees, so as the longest recomended 18“ bar.
With some of the trees, there is no „acceptably unsafe“ way to stand and cut on both sides, so I´ll have to cut it from one side all. Also, I´m looking for some bucking comfort for anything dia above that 13,5“ of useful bar lenght.
The amount of wood necessary to cut is not great, also I´m not pressed much by time-effectivenes and I like to play
. For sure, I´ll have to use the same techniques as if using a 36“ bar in 4,5´ wood. Using a 4,5 kW saw with 404 in above listed fat stuff shall be quite well dynamically resembling to a 20“ bar with 325 on my 2 kW saw.And here I need some input and discussion of my thoughs, since 325 is new to me and real world is much more geen and blue than grey theory and „snack-sack“ maths:
Simple and obvious idea is to use a 20“ bar (probably the longest I can get here)-no big deal in larch or even some of the oak when sharpening to a tad of self-feed and driving the saw light-handed. But with the locust I´m pretty suspicious, since the wood is pretty strong and stark.
I´ve learned rhe hard way, that there´s mostly no big deal to cut the chips even with a long, burried saw in no-matter-how-hard-wood, but most of the fun is to pry them out from the cut. That little bastards are pressing and squeezing themselves wherever they can to be cut in two once again, be overrided by the cutter twice again, to be rolled, pressed and stored in the cut, thus preventing the cutter effectively to reach the intact wood, and be bent and pushed hard by the chain or blade, instead of flowing nicely under the cutting plate and generaly doing whatever they can to eat any power in the vicinity. This started me to make my own sawblades for my 40“ bucksaw and using a 404 on a chainsaw. Both maybe sometimes slower than „standardly adopted technologies“, but if properly set for the job, much less power demanding on the final bill.
So, 325 full-comp is pretty „dense“ chain with not-so-much volume for chips, at least as it seems to me and my measurements. Grinding away 1/3 of teeth making a 2/3 comp semi-skip (L-R-L-R-_-_-L-R-L-R-_-_-L) or half the teeth, creating five full-skip (L-R-_-_-L-R-_-_-L-R-_-_-L) seems to me be very helpful. Also in terms of number of teeth „in charge“, which is on full-skip even lower than on burried 15“ full-comp armed bar (no problem for the saw, but no heavy leaning on it is aplicable in the locust).
Also I think here about grinding the rakers not to recomended 0,025“, but just sth like 0,020“ or even less and using a 8t drive sprocket, which in my opinion should not load the engine too much by chip thickness and so improve the efectiveness by the matter of chain speed, since any little engine is much stronger in terms of power in revs, than in terms of torque. It worked for me on 404, but you can park an airship into that chain, compared to the 325.
I know for sure that everything mentioned WILL work SOMEHOW. I´m trying to figure out the most efficient, fastest and thus safest combo (of all that ineficient weird ideas, if you relly on manuals). Because some trees must have cuts been done before they even realize it and before gravitation starts thinking about doing it´s part of the job-I think most of you knows this better than me.
Few weeks ago I saw in action a beated stock Stihl 270 with 24 or 25“ bar and 3/8 low profile full-chisel, making it´s way through bucking a 32“x36“ black locust, uprooted in park. No competition speed of course, but surprisingly decent working speed as the operator was really not a former or actual feller-by the overall habits and being incapable of proper leveling two perpendicular cuts into each other, so he alwyas had to bore and ream a bit to side to hit the previous cut on the oposite part of the trunk. The cuts were between 45 (in part with heart root) and 78-80 (in healty part) seconds, always including needed reaming and care for not hitting the concrete underneath.
That´s quite acceptable speed for my purposes, since I know I´ll have to use bore cuts quite frequently to have the hinge properly finished and then releasing the tree or buck by cutting just the holding strap or post. So, since the 270 has 2,6 kW, I asume that my 2041 with 20“ bar in 325 with proper raker settings and chain mods shall be right on par (if not better) with that full-comp 3/8 low-pro on 24“.
(Except of „use bigger saw, madman“, which is obvious and impossible for now)
By Your experience, which way would you go?
Can be a full-comp chain with about ,020-,015“ or a bit less raker clearance used efectively on a 20“ bar (compared to skip chains there or full-comp on 15“ bar) without overloading the saw? (Seems improbable to me, but no added price for the question here-at least I hope so
)Are there any other possible solutions, playing the chain and sprocket altering game I missed somehow?
