Ideal milling 660

[earlthegoat2]

If you could build a 660 up for the dedicated purpose of milling, how would you build it? This question is not rhetorical and does apply to me. I want to build a 660 for this purpose. I would build something in the class of an 088 but don't have the coin for the initial purchase. I have 2 660s. One is a good all around saw and this other one I have needs some work so I thought why not a milling specific build.

Would you run 3/8 or .404? Ported? Muffler modded? High output oiler? Auxiliary oiler? Air filter mods?

The only real stipulation is it has to have a 36" bar because that is the size of my milling jig.

 

[lumberjackchef]

Many things to consider here.

Size of your average log???

Species of lumber you mill the most?

Fuel consumption??..the more you mod...the thirstier the girl!!!!

How much of the work will be done yourself vs. Paying a modder to do the work?



Sent from my N9516 using Tapatalk

 

[SeMoTony]

If you could build a 660 up for the dedicated purpose of milling, how would you build it? This question is not rhetorical and does apply to me. I want to build a 660 for this purpose. I would build something in the class of an 088 but don't have the coin for the initial purchase. I have 2 660s. One is a good all around saw and this other one I have needs some work so I thought why not a milling specific build.

Would you run 3/8 or .404? Ported? Muffler modded? High output oiler? Auxiliary oiler? Air filter mods?

The only real stipulation is it has to have a 36" bar because that is the size of my milling jig.

I have an 066 that needs rings minimum. I have used 460 for my hobby milling. On the ms-460 I've MM'd and added hy-flo filtration. My avatar shows the longest bar I have run and the3" table use slabs. That has worked for me so far. On the066 I plan to do very little more. From what I've read taking casting bulges and imperfections out of the intake and exhaust ports in the cylinder will help the flow since these are self powered air pumps. Some of the builders will port the cylinder for you with out sending saw complete. Advancing the timing with a file on the key is done.All that I have learned of these processes has come from search on this site. please keep us posted with pictures of your efforts & results....404 barely larger cut than 3/8" tougher a bit more resistance for the same sharpness. Higher flo on non cut side slings off tip causing need of aux. oiler. mill safe (-;

 

[earlthegoat2]

30" average log. But there will be some 40"+ logs in there too. Mostly hickory with maple and oak here and there. Whatever the fuel consumption is, it is. That's the cost of doing business. I'm not really looking to do a build specific to my needs but rather a build that is highly suitable to anything that my 36" mill could ever come up against while maintaining reliability and longevity. Obviously, the tuning is very important. I can do that though without much fuss.

I guess I should have said I am open to hypothetical builds where there is unlimited budget and no compromises. Milling saws are not hot saws so I feel a proper milling build could be done a bit more economically by comparison.

 

[Jimbo209]

interested in building a brother saw to this

 

[lumberjackchef]

30" average log. But there will be some 40"+ logs in there too. Mostly hickory with maple and oak here and there. Whatever the fuel consumption is, it is. That's the cost of doing business. I'm not really looking to do a build specific to my needs but rather a build that is highly suitable to anything that my 36" mill could ever come up against while maintaining reliability and longevity. Obviously, the tuning is very important. I can do that though without much fuss.

I guess I should have said I am open to hypothetical builds where there is unlimited budget and no compromises. Milling saws are not hot saws so I feel a proper milling build could be done a bit more economically by comparison.

Sounds like you will be putting her through a lot of wide, dense hardwood so I would opt for more displacement and not just a modded stock bore cylinder. The latest generation of big bores are much higher quality than the fist gen versions with better timing numbers as well. This will take you from 90 cc's to right about 99cc's on the 660. You can get along very well with a BB kit, no base gasket, MM 660 in wide hardwood.

The other option would be to find the older style 066 flattop non-decomp cylinder and send it to a reputable builder to be milled and ported. You can then do a bolt on swap. These cylinders have a smaller combustion dome and run better than the 660 cylinder IMO......

Sent from my N9516 using Tapatalk

 

[SeMoTony]

Sounds like you will be putting her through a lot of wide, dense hardwood so I would opt for more displacement and not just a modded stock bore cylinder. The latest generation of big bores are much higher quality than the fist gen versions with better timing numbers as well. This will take you from 90 cc's to right about 99cc's on the 660. You can get along very well with a BB kit, no base gasket, MM 660 in wide hardwood.

The other option would be to find the older style 066 flattop non-decomp cylinder and send it to a reputable builder to be milled and ported. You can then do a bolt on swap. These cylinders have a smaller combustion dome and run better than the 660 cylinder IMO......

Sent from my N9516 using Tapatalk

Thanx for more info on my 066! The better I get the air flo in -use- flo out of the heat the bigger the grin (-;

 

[SeMoTony]

If you could build a 660 up for the dedicated purpose of milling, how would you build it? This question is not rhetorical and does apply to me. I want to build a 660 for this purpose. I would build something in the class of an 088 but don't have the coin for the initial purchase. I have 2 660s. One is a good all around saw and this other one I have needs some work so I thought why not a milling specific build.

Would you run 3/8 or .404? Ported? Muffler modded? High output oiler? Auxiliary oiler? Air filter mods?

The only real stipulation is it has to have a 36" bar because that is the size of my milling jig.

I left out that on 42" and longer bars I run skip chisel in hard wood, milling chain in soft til 50" bar where the soft wood is skip chain also. I also suffer CAD no it's not suffering since I'm already grinning over acquiring A Masterminded 661 before the end of the month. Now I'll email Randy and Ask for his instruct on mix ratio and break-in prior to getting into more free slicing. So many people can't move the log w/tractor or won't buy a large enough saw of their own. Gratitude on both sides for saved funds. Live edge wider than available from most places. 2 Tooooo much fun (-;

 

[SeMoTony]

30" average log. But there will be some 40"+ logs in there too. Mostly hickory with maple and oak here and there. Whatever the fuel consumption is, it is. That's the cost of doing business. I'm not really looking to do a build specific to my needs but rather a build that is highly suitable to anything that my 36" mill could ever come up against while maintaining reliability and longevity. Obviously, the tuning is very important. I can do that though without much fuss.

I guess I should have said I am open to hypothetical builds where there is unlimited budget and no compromises. Milling saws are not hot saws so I feel a proper milling build could be done a bit more economically by comparison.

If you are really open minded-- cannon dual powerhead bar around 48" . I forget the specific lengths available except for the 72" I've got on order. Ask BobL, he has indicated that exact match isn't needed IIRC as far as power at rpm.My avatar shows 60" bar. . . first use. . . a 72" wood have given a slice with even more character from the root butrusses. Owners SiL has since ground up that oportunity. Gonna b ready if another oportunity presents.

 

[BobL]

Exact match is not important. dual powerhead and like two cylinder engines but instead of the jugs being connected by a crank they are connected by a chain. Think about the cylinders in a conventional engine, it doesn't really matter if one particular cylinder puts out a bit more power than the other and they don't all have the exact same compression or air/exhaust flow paths anyway.

If you are going with a dual head on a 36" mill I wouldn't bother doing any more than a mild muffler mod which helps keep the powerhead cool. With two power heads there will be more than enough grunt to cut any hardness of wood you come across at that cutting width. If you want to put your efforts into something productive, the thing that will give you greatest return for your time would be testing and timing cuts with different chain sharpening parameters. You could put a lot of time into fine tuning the powerhead but poor chain optimisation is normally the weakest link in most milling setups. The testing and timing of cuts takes WAAAAY more time than folks think it will, which is one reason why to is not done. If you want fast cutting times you will need to experiment with raker depths well in excess of those found on stock chains. There should be more than enough power to allow the mill to pull itself through the wood. this will require experimenting with the top plate cutting angle. All this has to be traded off against excess vibe, B&C wear and tear, and chains going blunt too quickly.

 

[SeMoTony]

Exact match is not important. dual powerhead and like two cylinder engines but instead of the jugs being connected by a crank they are connected by a chain. Think about the cylinders in a conventional engine, it doesn't really matter if one particular cylinder puts out a bit more power than the other and they don't all have the exact same compression or air/exhaust flow paths anyway.

If you are going with a dual head on a 36" mill I wouldn't bother doing any more than a mild muffler mod which helps keep the powerhead cool. With two power heads there will be more than enough grunt to cut any hardness of wood you come across at that cutting width. If you want to put your efforts into something productive, the thing that will give you greatest return for your time would be testing and timing cuts with different chain sharpening parameters. You could put a lot of time into fine tuning the powerhead but poor chain optimisation is normally the weakest link in most milling setups. The testing and timing of cuts takes WAAAAY more time than folks think it will, which is one reason why to is not done. If you want fast cutting times you will need to experiment with raker depths well in excess of those found on stock chains. There should be more than enough power to allow the mill to pull itself through the wood. this will require experimenting with the top plate cutting angle. All this has to be traded off against excess vibe, B&C wear and tear, and chains going blunt too quickly.

Thanks Bob for simply stating the answer to a question I did not know how to frame.

 

[lumberjackchef]

Exact match is not important. dual powerhead and like two cylinder engines but instead of the jugs being connected by a crank they are connected by a chain. Think about the cylinders in a conventional engine, it doesn't really matter if one particular cylinder puts out a bit more power than the other and they don't all have the exact same compression or air/exhaust flow paths anyway.

If you are going with a dual head on a 36" mill I wouldn't bother doing any more than a mild muffler mod which helps keep the powerhead cool. With two power heads there will be more than enough grunt to cut any hardness of wood you come across at that cutting width. If you want to put your efforts into something productive, the thing that will give you greatest return for your time would be testing and timing cuts with different chain sharpening parameters. You could put a lot of time into fine tuning the powerhead but poor chain optimisation is normally the weakest link in most milling setups. The testing and timing of cuts takes WAAAAY more time than folks think it will, which is one reason why to is not done. If you want fast cutting times you will need to experiment with raker depths well in excess of those found on stock chains. There should be more than enough power to allow the mill to pull itself through the wood. this will require experimenting with the top plate cutting angle. All this has to be traded off against excess vibe, B&C wear and tear, and chains going blunt too quickly.

He's right ya know.! [emoji106]

A chain modification is where its at for sure.. Just by modifying angles and depth gauges I can get through most soft and medium hardwood twice as fast as a stock ripping chain will cut off the reel...... The trade off is having to touch up those dozens and dozens of teeth more often....... Good input BobL....

Sent from my N9516 using Tapatalk

 

[Trx250r180]

If you could build a 660 up for the dedicated purpose of milling, how would you build it? This question is not rhetorical and does apply to me. I want to build a 660 for this purpose. I would build something in the class of an 088 but don't have the coin for the initial purchase. I have 2 660s. One is a good all around saw and this other one I have needs some work so I thought why not a milling specific build.

Would you run 3/8 or .404? Ported? Muffler modded? High output oiler? Auxiliary oiler? Air filter mods?

The only real stipulation is it has to have a 36" bar because that is the size of my milling jig.

I mill with a 660 ,the saw only gets used for milling ,i had it ported for milling use/tourque so its happy spot milling is about 9k rpms on the tach in the cut ,i run a 7 pin sprocket ,and went to .063 .404 chain for the oiling advantage ,and chain seems to stay sharp longer than the 3/8 did ,and does not stretch as easy ,I have played with mufflers ,i like the stock can with baffle intact and a stock dual front cover ,keeping the baffle in helps on keeping it quieter .Chain is where it is at over the porting in my opinion ,I square grind with a top plate between 10 and 15 degrees ,and get a nice finish with chisel chain ,i keep the rakes at .025 also for a smoother finish in the lumber ,i cut mostly doug fir and cedar softwoods ,so something like oak may need a different setup than what i use .I think my tach is set around 13k unloaded ,and run the same gas at 40 to 1 milling as i do cutting .I put an outerwear skin on the airfilter so it does not pack up as fast .the cannon bars seem to be the stiffest i have found for side flex and don't wear down as fast .To get the most of a 36 inch alaska mill i run a 42 inch bar ,with a 36 inch bar i lose a few inches from where the mill clamps on .

 

[earlthegoat2]

Great insights so far. Thanks fellas.

 

[BobL]

Chain is where it is at over the porting in my opinion ,I square grind with a top plate between 10 and 15 degrees ,and get a nice finish with chisel chain ,i keep the rakes at .025 also for a smoother finish in the lumber ,i cut mostly doug fir and cedar softwoods ,so something like oak may need a different setup than what i use .

If you leave your rakers at 0.025", as the cutters wear and the gullet gets wide the cutters simply cannot bite as much wood because the angle the cutter presents to the wood decreases. The way around this is to progressively drop the rakers as the gullets get wider. Nominally new stock 040 and 3/8 chain has a gullet of ~0.25" and a 0.025" raker depth (i.e. 10:1 ratio) but when the gullet is 0.4" the rakers should be set to 0.040" and when the gullet reaches 0.5" the raker depth should be 0.050". etc
This will provide the same angle of presentation by the cutter to the wood all the way through the life of the chain.

This method of setting rakers is called progressive raker setting A 10:1 ratio corresponds to a raker angle of 5.7º (see this thread for all the grimy details) but this is in fact quite a lightweight angle for an 066 running a 36" bar. A few year back Mntgun was running ~9º rakers with his stick 066 in your softwoods - this corresponds to a raker depth setting of 0.04"! for new chain. Mtngun found this was his optimum angle with significantly improved cutting speed. Now I recommend you don't do that straight up front but slowly increase the raker depth until the chain starts to grab to the point where it feels like its going to stall, then swipe the cutters a few times as this will back off the raker angle and you should find the chain will cut better than new until the cutters start dropping off.

Have a read of the thread I linked to above and read what CS users say when they try this method out - they simply cannot believe how much difference it makes.

FWIW I use 6.5 degrees on my 3/8 semichisel on the 880 with a 43/60" bar. This corresponds to a new raker depth of 0.028". On my 441 with a 25" bar with lopro I use 7.0º which corresponds to a new raker depth of 0.031". Bear in mind I'm cutting wood that is much harder than what you guys see. I'd be running significantly higher angles if I ever got to mill softwoods.

 

[Trx250r180]

If you leave your rakers at 0.025", as the cutters wear and the gullet gets wide the cutters simply cannot bite as much wood because the angle the cutter presents to the wood decreases. The way around this is to progressively drop the rakers as the gullets get wider. Nominally new stock 040 and 3/8 chain has a gullet of ~0.25" and a 0.025" raker depth (i.e. 10:1 ratio) but when the gullet is 0.4" the rakers should be set to 0.040" and when the gullet reaches 0.5" the raker depth should be 0.050". etc
This will provide the same angle of presentation by the cutter to the wood all the way through the life of the chain.

This method of setting rakers is called progressive raker setting A 10:1 ratio corresponds to a raker angle of 5.7º (see this thread for all the grimy details) but this is in fact quite a lightweight angle for an 066 running a 36" bar. A few year back Mntgun was running ~9º rakers with his stick 066 in your softwoods - this corresponds to a raker depth setting of 0.04"! for new chain. Mtngun found this was his optimum angle with significantly improved cutting speed. Now I recommend you don't do that straight up front but slowly increase the raker depth until the chain starts to grab to the point where it feels like its going to stall, then swipe the cutters a few times as this will back off the raker angle and you should find the chain will cut better than new until the cutters start dropping off.

Have a read of the thread I linked to above and read what CS users say when they try this method out - they simply cannot believe how much difference it makes.

FWIW I use 6.5 degrees on my 3/8 semichisel on the 880 with a 43/60" bar. This corresponds to a new raker depth of 0.028". On my 441 with a 25" bar with lopro I use 7.0º which corresponds to a new raker depth of 0.031". Bear in mind I'm cutting wood that is much harder than what you guys see. I'd be running significantly higher angles if I ever got to mill softwoods.

May be the mill i use ,i have a Norwood where the end of the bar is out in the open ,not clamped like an alaska mill ,I have tried different raker depths ,the more aggressive i get .030,.040 etc the rougher the finish is ,and it tears the fibers too much making ugly boards with chips hanging half cut off ,and washboard marks in the finish ,the chain also dulls faster in my experience ,i am not running round ,i use square chisel bit so i can get away with higher rakers and still cut pretty fast ,i actually do not touch the rakes for 3-4 sharpens on the grinder ,i let the feed tell me when they need done ,if i have to start pushing at all ,2 swipes on the rakes with a file usually does it .Here is one of my cutters off the grinder ,i get pretty nice finish in the lumber with this grind ,maybe smoother than a band mill . produces . This is a .404 link ,i like the .404 for the better oiling ,and seems more durable so do not have to sharpen as often .

 

[BobL]

May be the mill i use ,i have a Norwood where the end of the bar is out in the open ,not clamped like an alaska mill ,I have tried different raker depths ,the more aggressive i get .030,.040 etc the rougher the finish is ,and it tears the fibers too much making ugly boards with chips hanging half cut off ,and washboard marks in the finish .

The open ended mill and square chisel is not going to help finish but I find it hard to believe your chains are cutting as fast when they are close to the end of their life as when they are new using constant raker depth (0.025"). I get LOTS of old saws with chains new the end of their life given to me to look because they're not cutting - I usually just drop the rakers to where they should be and the owners are blown away by the improvement in performance.

Washboarding is cause by a synchronicity between RPM in the cut, wood hardness and width of the cut. Small logs and big saws will encounter this every now and the if these 3 planets align then it will happen. High rakers nibble at the wood so is less likely to cause it. Because this only happens on smaller logs, with an Alaskan just angling the mill too change the width of the cut will fix this but I guess this is no so easy to do with Norwood style mill.

In my experience finish is mostly dependent on the operator.
This is my typical finish semi chisel, 3/8, 6.5º raker angle on medium hard wood.


Back in 2014 I was milling as part of a nature playground construction site in the city (http://www.arboristsite.com/community/threads/back-to-milling.256768/) when some landscapers turned up and they came over to see what I was doing.
They ask the usual questions, we're you from etc
They ran their hands over the finish of the milled timber and exclaimed at how good it was and said. "We're from Manjimup (major milling town in tall timber country 200 miles south of the city) and we mill timber and can never get it this smooth, how'dya do it?"
The implication here is how does a city slicker like me get a better finish than country boys who should know all there is to know about milling timber.
"S'oright" I said, "I'm originally from Pemberton" (a small timber town even further south than Manjimup, in even taller timber country).
There is a big rivalry between the two towns so it must have pissed them off a bit but I was excused because I was really a country lad.

 

[Trx250r180]

May be the chains we are using ,i was running semi chisel ripping chain ,round sharpened ,it needed more raker to cut ,another guy told me he was getting good finish with square chisel ,i had a hard time concepting a pointy corner could do a nice of finish as a round corner ,till i experimented ,the high rakers on the square i was able to get a nice finish ,and is faster than my ripping chain was ,a 5.5 inch 8 foot pass off a cant goes pretty fast ,where a 20 inch wide slab 8 foot long can take a minute and a half or so ,i do have a wider kerf with the chisel .404 so i lose more material in sawdust waste .

 

[BobL]

i do have a wider kerf with the chisel .404 so i lose more material in sawdust waste .

When I measured kerf sizes back in 2010 I found surprisingly little difference between 404 and 3/8 (between 5 and 9%_
There's a geeky discussion of Kerf sizes in this thread http://www.arboristsite.com/community/threads/real-kerf-sizes.137465/
My kerf measuring stick used from post #10 onwards in that thread looks like this
It's a slowly tapering stick with widths marked on it

 

[Trx250r180]

Here is the .050 ripping chain along side the .063 .404 i use now ,i had to run an aux oiler with the ripping chain or the bar would smoke from heat ,the .404 oils so much better .I have been wanting to try out picco in .063 to see if can get another 2x6 out of a cant or not ,seems like my sawdust pile grows faster with the .404 .