New Saw?

[Jim Ostergard]

I use a jonsered 2152C for limbing as I get really tired if I use the Stihls all day. The newer ones have a compression release and a gas bulb to push fuel into it. I have beat one up for 3 years and it still works well. I have a problem here in Maine getting an agressive chain but Brad Johnson put me onto Windy River supply in New Hampshire and I just ask for the most agressive chain they have and it arrives the next day. I keep a spare. Also make sure you get the correct file with it and I would recommend getting the preferd roller sharping guide as it is easy to file the small chain so it hooks. I love this saw although it doesn’t seem to bore cut as well as the more powerful saw.
Jim

[Gabe Ayers]

I have a 346 XP as my smallest saw and it is great. The one thing I don’t like is that the clutch on it won’t accomodate a 3/8 chain. This is true of many of the 50 cc and smaller saws. I just like the 3/8 chisel loops much better, but other than that the 346 runs great and has plenty of zip. I second Carl’s comments about not going too small, as a powerful and sharp saw makes for easy cutting. Latethis summer I invested in a 2172 Jonsered, and though it is heavier than my old 357 I am not as tired at the end of the day because each cut is more efficient with more power. The other trick is to keep your bar length as short as possible given your work with that saw.
-Brad

[Jim Ostergard]

l like the 3/8 chain and years ago changed my smaller saw over to it. I thought the decrease in power needed to run the larger saw was a disadvantage. So I have stayed with the smaller chain on these saws and really cannot complain.
Jim

[Mark Cowdrey]

Brad,
Why did you go Jonsred instead of sticking with Husky?
Also, from a guy who doesn’t cut that much and uses a 50 cc saw w a .325 chain.
1. Given a specific tooth configuration, it seems a smaller chain would take less power to run, therefore maximizing use of power available (chain speed), equaling faster cutting.
2. If this is not true, why not? If it is true, what other factor (other than a Ford/Chevy argument) indicates selecting a 3/8 chain?
Thanks,
Mark

I just partially answered my own question through Wikipedia:
“Gauge. The gauge of the chain is the thickness of the drive links, and is dictated by the gauge of the bar on which it is to be run. Usual gauges are .050″ (1.3 mm) – .058″ (1.5 mm) and .063″ (1.6 mm). Chain and bar gauge must match; a chain that is too large will not fit, one that is too small will fall sideways and cut poorly.
Pitch. The pitch of the chain is the average distance between two rivets. As the distance between rivets varies, the pitch can be measured by measuring between three rivets and dividing this distance by two. Usual pitches are 0.325″, 3/8″ and 0.404″. 3/4″ is used for harvester applications, and very rarely for handheld cutting. the pitch of the chain must match the drive sprocket, and the nose sprocket (if fitted).”

So that indicates to me that it is the gauge that I was thinking of even though I was using the term pitch (incorrectly). So a .325 chain has (I think) more teeth on a given length of chain which would tend to….require more power??? Back to my original thought, a follow up question would be, is the gauge of a 3/8 chain typically heavier than that of a .325?

[Does’ Leap]

@dominiquer60 30893 wrote:

I read this entire thread last night while many of you were off gallivanting in Athol 🙂 I thought that I would add to it seeing as my questions are along similar lines and it would keep all of this great and related advice together…………I welcome any advice on this matter,

Erika:

To echo what others have said, I believe a smaller saw is generally more fatiguing than a larger one. I have purchased progressively larger saws over the past 15 years settling on the Husq. 372 XP. Although I do most of the cutting, Kristan runs the saw on occasion and did more chainsaw work in the past (mostly blocking wood). Every larger saw I bought, she would pick it up (new) and complain about the weight. After cutting with it, she would concur how that bigger saws are easier on the body and get the job done quicker. Of course there is a limit to this. I am not interested in getting a bigger saw, despite the power. There is a sweet spot given your physical stature and what you are cutting.

Carl also brings up an essential point on having a sharp chain. I am surprised by how many folks pay to have their chain sharpened. Invest in a decent vice and files and importantly a flat file and raker gauge. When I first started cutting wood I sharpened my saw teeth like a pro and the thing still wouldn’t cut. Finally,someone told me to file down my rakers (I use a .004 raker gauge). Voila! I was off to the races. Sharp teeth and raker depth go hand in hand. A sharp 40 cc saw will put my dull 72 cc saw to shame. I am not sure these are available for smaller saws, but I recommend single raker, chisel tooth chains (compared to a double raker safety chains with rounded teeth). These chains cut much more aggressively and I believe are just as safe with proper cutting technique. It is also a lot easier to file down your rakers, especially as you wear your chian down.

Lastly, I am not a fan of short bars. If you are blocking wood, you have to lean over that much further. A lot of guys who block sugar wood all day around here run 24″ bars minimum. I run a 20″ bar for all around use.

George

[Jim Ostergard]

I mentioned before going to Windy Ridge (think I called it Windy River before) in Tamworth, New Hampshire for a decent non consumer safety chain. 603.323.2323. They mail it and you have it the next day. I have not found them in my part of Maine. Get the correct file also as I had a dealer give me a larger one and I just used it and between the safety chain that came with the saw and the file I couldn’t cut a thing. Keeping it sharp and the rakers filed it really works great. I use an 18″ bar.

[Gabe Ayers]

Mark-
Gauge does not depend on the pitch of the chain. In other words, I have run both 50 and 58 gauge bar and chain, with 3/8 pitch loops,on both of my larger saws. I now use 58 because my local saw shop seems to keep that gauge bar and chain in stock most times of the year. In terms of Jonsered vs Husky, I have had very poor luck with my Husky 357 xp, which is only three years old but has had all kinds of mechanical problems. I have had great luck with the smaller 346 xp, so no complaints there. I decided to try the Jonsered because both Carl and Kevin Rea have them and said they are good saws. They were also having a saw swap that sweetened the deal a bit financially. And, I totally agree with Carl and George about having sharp chain. I carry 2-3 loops in the woods each day and swap them as they get dull, saving the sharpening for the evening in the vise with good light, warm hands, a beer!
-Brad

[Mark Cowdrey]

Brad,
Thanks for the added info on your saw selection process.Keep us posted on how it works out.
So, to follow up the .325 v 3/8 issue, I am guessing that fewer teeth per inch (W/the 3/8) translates into a less bogging/faster chain speed/faster cutting scenario?? Is that it?
Thanks,
Mark

[Carl Russell]

@Mark Cowdrey 31017 wrote:

Brad,
Thanks for the added info on your saw selection process.Keep us posted on how it works out.
So, to follow up the .325 v 3/8 issue, I am guessing that fewer teeth per inch (W/the 3/8) translates into a less bogging/faster chain speed/faster cutting scenario?? Is that it?
Thanks,
Mark

No it is to keep things simple…. one file, and if the bar length is the same on each saw then the loops are interchangeable.

The smaller pitch chain has less resistance in the wood. If the only saw you are using is the .325 then that isn’t a problem. You can buy a larger sprocket for your saw to use 3/8 chain, but I always figured it wasn’t worth it. I just buy a box of smaller files.

As far a Husky vs. Jonsreds….. one is orange, one is black and red…… the Jonsreds saws are typically Husky saws that have been discontinued and put in a different cover. Brad’s new 2272 is probably the Husky 372. Both excellent saws.

Carl

[near horse]

With regard to sawyer fatigue, I like to use the log help support the saw while limbing. I know some folks walk along the top of the log and limb (longer bar). I’d be interested to hear what you all do.

[Does’ Leap]

Geoff:

I do the same as you – starting at the base of the tree I walk down on its left using the tree as support when possible.

George

[Anonymous]

If I’m cutting more than one tree in an area or there is a dead tree to use I like to orginize my work that the tree lays on a bench. This enables the cutter to work at as close to waist hieght as possible and the saw to be suported by the tree. I also like shorter bars for this method.

Tristan

[Scott G]

As you move on in your logging career you’ll become more “in-tune”, and somewhat non-negotiable, on what your saw, bar, & chain combo are. Longer bars are common out here among professional saw users, not necessarily as a function of larger wood, but ergonmics. We do a lot of slashing and limbing due to working pretty much exclusively in conifer forests. Also, our slash depth guidelines are very low 18 -24″ max. In other words, there is a lot of saw work. I use a 28″ bar which enables me to stay upright all day. With a very bad back, I’m more than happy to carry a very small amount of extra weight to avoid being hunched over all day. Using the bench method of delimbing wouldn’t normally fly out here as we are all operating with a “strip layout” starting at the back of a unit and working out to the front with everything linear and parallel to one another. Having a layout other than that is normally cause for much cursing and nashing of teeth. We don’t usually cut on an individual tree mark basis. We treat the entire unit, efffectively reducing the basal area (density) over the entire cutblock to achieve our mgmnt objectives. Hence the difference in the felling layout.

The best all-around saw for my purposes is the Husky 372XP. That model has served me very well since it replaced the 371, over a decade ago. I just found out this week, though, that the 372 now comes exclusively with a stratified carb. Not happy… I’m waiting for someone to now explain to me what the REAL difference is between the 575 and the 372 now that the change has been made. My guess is that it is once again an effort by Husky to phase out the 372.

So,… I use a 372XP, 28″ Oregeon bar, with 92 drivelinks of Oregeon “L” series 3/8″ pitch, .050 gauge, full-comp,round-ground chisel. The 28″ bar calls for 93 drivers but I hate breaking at a cutter (I spin my own chain) so I back it off to 92 so that I can break at a tie strap.

Erica, I totally agree with Carl when it comes to purchasing a pro saw. If you get into this at a higher level you will be much happier. If not, the saw will last you forever provided you take good care of it. My vote for you would be for a Husky 357 with an 18-20″ bar.

My two cents..

[Rick Alger]

Dominiquer60,

The Pro saws are definitely better, but if money is an issue, a 2150 Jonsered will do everything you need for around half the price of a pro saw.

I have one that has cut well over 20 tractor trailer loads of logs and pulp, covered 30 acres of weed and thin work and bucked up maybe a dozen cords of small diameter firewood. It has been through a couple bars and half-a-dozen chains, and it is still going strong. As long as you keep the chain sharp and avoid overheating the powerhead by cleaning the fins etc, this little saw should last you a long time.

If you run into huge wood or serious mud conditions, borrow a 372.

My additional two cents.

[Anonymous]

@Scott G 31072 wrote:

As you move on in your logging career you’ll become more “in-tune”, and somewhat non-negotiable, on what your saw, bar, & chain combo are. Longer bars are common out here among professional saw users, not necessarily as a function of larger wood, but ergonmics. We do a lot of slashing and limbing due to working pretty much exclusively in conifer forests. Also, our slash depth guidelines are very low 18 -24″ max. In other words, there is a lot of saw work. I use a 28″ bar which enables me to stay upright all day. With a very bad back, I’m more than happy to carry a very small amount of extra weight to avoid being hunched over all day. Using the bench method of delimbing wouldn’t normally fly out here as we are all operating with a “strip layout” starting at the back of a unit and working out to the front with everything linear and parallel to one another. Having a layout other than that is normally cause for much cursing and nashing of teeth. We don’t usually cut on an individual tree mark basis. We treat the entire unit, efffectively reducing the basal area (density) over the entire cutblock to achieve our mgmnt objectives. Hence the difference in the felling layout

We also cut in narrow strips starting at the back one cutter working next to another although staggerd. the method of using benches to both keep trees off the ground and to pile is more suitable to the kind of uniform thinning, than single tree selection cutting that we are concentating on at this time. Methods of laying out cut strips and how we use the conditions to our advantage would be an interesting thread. Laying a tree into the next mans strip, cutting a big tree out of his stip dosn’tgo over well.I think Carl has a story of some one getting stuffed into thier own car trunk for less. lol

Happy logging

Tristan

[Author]

Posts