A new extreme lo pro experiment

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

Though in my limited use of lo pro w an 87cc Stihl and 36” bars I’ve had no issues and lo pro millers in the UK and Europe are routinely using 661’s, I’ve always been really doubtful that an 880 could run the 48” GB lo pro bar - that comes in an 880 mount - without an extremely light touch or chains would snap. (The 64” seems to me too flexible a bar to even consider regardless of anything else.) But as the 880 is my most reliable saw and I’ve become addicted to the bandsaw-like smoothness of lo pro finish, I’m going to see if I can make it work. First step is to try to dramatically reduce torque and increase chain speed. So I ordered a massive 10 tooth LP sprocket from 6K in Washington. As big as can be run and still have good sprocket to bar rail transfer on an 880 tail mount. Next issue is chip clearance in lo pro chain. Goes like all blazes til 26” wide slabs or so then when 18-20 cutters in the 28-30” slab range are engaged it clogs and cuts far worse. So either full skip - which I’ve never been impressed by in .404 chains - or more preferably every other cutter pair on full comp removed would reduce cutters engaged by 1.5 or 2 times respectively for a given width and greatly improve chip clearance. Theoretically this should allow me to reduce chain load reducing chance of breakage and have fast efficient cutting. One wildcard is whether this increases load on individual cutter teeth and increases the chance of chains snapping at the cutters. Time will tell. Have to order the bar from the UK next and buy an LP chain roll to make loops from. PMX is most likely to hold up fine but it’s so expensive will experiment w a 25’ roll of Archer first to see if it’s strong enough. Pretty sure the 10 tooth sprocket will require an extra link beyond what that bar normally uses.

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

This is what the 10 tooth lo pro sprocket looks like at the tail of a fat 20" .404 bar, which is considerably wider in the belly than GB's lo pro bars. So because of the belly width it gets pulled much higher on entry than I calculated. I expect the chain will lay flat on the rail a bit further up than I calculated on the 48" lo pro bar, but not nearly as much as this.

 

[Lightning Performance]

This is what the 10 tooth lo pro sprocket looks like at the tail of a fat 20" .404 bar, which is considerably wider in the belly than GB's lo pro bars. So because of the belly width it gets pulled much higher on entry than I calculated. I expect the chain will lay flat on the rail a bit further up than I calculated on the 48" lo pro bar, but not nearly as much as this.

Not good. I went to a ten pin with an old Homlite mount bar in Sabre roller nose. You need the chain to enter the tail cleanly not sliding into it. I used a 93dl chain on regular 3/8 on what normally runs a 91dl chain. My tail is about the tallest one you can find.

Your going to need to cut the bar down more then likely if it kicks the chain off.

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

Not good. I went to a ten pin with an old Homlite mount bar in Sabre roller nose. You need the chain to enter the tail cleanly not sliding into it. I used a 93dl chain on regular 3/8 on what normally runs a 91dl chain. My tail is about the tallest one you can find.

Your going to need to cut the bar down more then likely if it kicks the chain off.

Hmmm, I wondered... I thought before the runner tips would barely enter at the tail of the GB bar, now I'm doubting they will at all. Shoulda gotten a 9 tooth I guess. Maybe still should. Though I think my carbide tooth Makita metal cutting saw could lop some of the tail off cleanly not leaving any burrs or at least the most minimal cleanup. Won't know til I pull the trigger and buy the GB bar.

 

[Lightning Performance]

Hmmm, I wondered... I thought before the runner tips would barely enter at the tail of the GB bar, now I'm doubting they will at all. Shoulda gotten a 9 tooth I guess. Maybe still should. Though I think my carbide tooth Makita metal cutting saw could lop some of the tail off cleanly not leaving any burrs or at least the most minimal cleanup. Won't know til I pull the trigger and buy the GB bar.

I used a cutoff wheel but my bar is also over an inch taller on the tail. You need to figure out how your going to add more bar adjuster holes and possibly oil holes.

An easy way to limit torque is back off the throttle, just sayin

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

An easy way to limit torque is back off the throttle, just sayin

Too true. That would be the standard approach. I'm just trying to idiot proof it for myself. May be trying to reinvent the wheel too much. I learned when breaking the chain yesterday the worst enemy is just letting chain dull too much and pushing too much to compensate, and doesn't matter how much torque you've reduced of the 880 in that case. The 64cc Makita clearly doesn't have all that much torque and it broke a chain. I think there's no getting around with lo pro that you need a lighter touch on the throttle on bigger saws and lighter on the mill always. I was looking around UK and Europe for cheaper 63PMX than Baileys to also reduce breakage chances, but at its cheapest it's still double the cost of Archer rolls so probably better just to use the cheaper stuff and a lighter touch and if I break some, I break some.

 

[Lightning Performance]

Too true. That would be the standard approach. I'm just trying to idiot proof it for myself. May be trying to reinvent the wheel too much. I learned when breaking the chain yesterday the worst enemy is just letting chain dull too much and pushing too much to compensate, and doesn't matter how much torque you've reduced of the 880 in that case. The 64cc Makita clearly doesn't have all that much torque and it broke a chain. I think there's no getting around with lo pro that you need a lighter touch on the throttle on bigger saws and lighter on the mill always. I was looking around UK and Europe for cheaper 63PMX than Baileys to also reduce breakage chances, but at its cheapest it's still double the cost of Archer rolls so probably better just to use the cheaper stuff and a lighter touch and if I break some, I break some.

When you consider all your trying to do with less just know others have already been here before you using Stihl chains not the cheap stuff. They broke picco with a 660 or 288 ported you don't need a bigger saw to tear up dull chain just time. The dull runs you made likely caused wear, then cracks and stresses from the chassis up. If you limit your cutters and keep them sharp your a less likely to cause heat fractures in your lower chassis so it won't break. Ask the guy in Europe if they cut dry wood or oak very much with picco or lp chain. You will find most don't or do it very slowly. The speed is in sharpness and not much else. Using 3/8 is just about as fast and far cheaper to run.

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

I just figure like any engineering, the more weak spots you eliminate the less chance you have of failure. That was my thinking behind preferring Stihl picco, not that it's indestructible or anything. A guy on an FB forum was complaining about snapping 63PMX right and left with a 48 bar w new chain on an 880, and I'm sure it was from lack of a light touch. I know from going over the forums here there was a lot of talk of using picco back from 2004-12 or so, but in the past decade there's been way less discussion of lo pro and people largely veered away from using it, except for a few diehards I've talked with who still feel nothing can touch it in ordinary size wood.

At the end of the day even if I'm a bit slower in large logs with lo pro, for me and my woodworking it's mostly about finish and trying to get as close to a bandsaw finish as I can. Much easier for me to do that with lo pro. So much less side load due to the low profile and small teeth that there's never any oscillation and dig no matter what the state of the chain. Trade off is more sharpening more often.

As far as expense, the reason I've gone down this road with deciding to buy the 48" lo pro bar is I feel like my 42" .404 bar doesn't get me much more than my 36" lo pro does with too much cutting waste, and my next bar is a 72" .404 bar which is too big to bother with in less than a 42" log. The GB 48" lo pro is $260 or so, free shipping, no tax. A quality bar for hardly any more than a 3/8" Forester cheapie 52". Sure it's higher initial chain cost but if you make your own chain loops cost isn't bad and once you have them, they last a long time if you don't break them, it's not like you're buying new chains every month. So I think a lot is made about high cost of lo pro that doesn't really add up.

I don't know what the European guys do, mostly it was developed there for flying through pine on Logosol mills and people do cut bigger hardwoods with it but not particularly fast, agreed. If I had a 660, I'd be happily running 3/8" in 25-40" wood most likely. But I have an 880 in stellar condition that always works flawlessly, and it's kind of a nonsensical pain in the ass to try to run 3/8" on one and I've gotten tired of the power requirements of .404 and the side load/oscillation/cut quality issues. The GB lo pro bar is an interesting oddity in being designed with an 880 mount, unlike nearly anything with a 3/8" nose sprocket.

Oh yeah, one more plus of big bar lo pro for me for woodworking - you can resaw thick slabs with minimal loss of wood and running it kind of as a bridge saw on rails on a flattening table you can level warped wood with it really smoothly in a fraction of the time of overhead router planing.

 

[J D]

An easy way to limit torque is back off the throttle, just sayin

Extended running at part throttle is a good way to burn up a saw

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

Extended running at part throttle is a good way to burn up a saw

Beyond that, it's just one too many things to think about. Nearly everyone mills at full throttle and controls rpm by how much load they put on the cut. People point out if you want a racecar, get one of the 90cc high rev saws, if you want a truck, get an 880/3120. Can seem a bit silly making a race truck, though people do it with porting/carb alteration/etc. But if I can kinda "hot saw" my 880 by a quick gear changeout and have it easily go back to being an ordinary hauling truck when I want it for that, then seems worthwhile. Since most folks under load tend to mill around 10000 rpm, I've never quite understood why some of the performance folks bash the rev limiters of 880's so much and insist they be removed as I don't think they kick in til at least 11500. People focus so much on rpm's in saws and there seem to be less experiments with sprockets/gearing which is the only thing that's going to up chain speed if you're keeping your rpm's steady around 10000 while milling. The main issue is saw bar tails are designed largely for a 1.5" diameter or less rim sprocket and to work with fairly small spur sprockets, so a 1.6" 8 tooth is seen as about the max. A long lo pro bar with much less belly than a 3/8" or .404 long bar and a wide tail at the tensioner holes to accommodate the 14mm Stihl slot of the 880 is a bar uniquely designed to handle larger drive sprockets. On standard 3/8" bars with more tapered tails, people usually have to cut the heel back and redrill everything to run 9 tooth or larger but I may be able to get away with a 10 tooth with just trimming the last bit of taper off of this bar and still have everything fit and feed well. With a 9 tooth I wouldn't have to alter it at all. It's set up w sets of tensioner and oiler holes to match both a 3002 and 3003 mount, will be interesting to see how it fits in both.

 

[sean donato]

I gotta ask, are you milling in the middle of no where, where you need the portability of a an Alaskan mill? I haven't touched mine since my cousin got a bandsaw mill. Even the cheap model he has kicks the crap out of any Alaskan set up I've even seen or ran.

 

[Coralillo Lo Pro]

I gotta ask, are you milling in the middle of no where, where you need the portability of a an Alaskan mill? I haven't touched mine since my cousin got a bandsaw mill. Even the cheap model he has kicks the crap out of any Alaskan set up I've even seen or ran.

No, the opposite, really, milling in a city. Live in a residential neighborhood in a rental house can't really run a bandsaw operation in. Don't have the gear to transport and lift large logs on to it. So my portability is about being able to salvage trees onsite in other people's yards around the city. Often they're in backyards w little gates and there's no moving the logs til they're milled. Sometimes like with the sycamore in my neighborhood I hauled down the street or a mesquite that's not too big I can load it on my truck and get it back to my house. I do personal milling for my own needs, so investing in an HD trailer/log arch, forklift, 30" capable bandsaw, etc, just not in the cards right now. Like to keep things simple and invest in no more than I need to do what I do. Someday when I get around to building my family a house on a large family property I'll get a bandsaw mill. I see the work small bandsaw mills are doing in the little towns outside of here, and yeah, way easier, great results, etc, but they have a lot of property and room to make a big mess of their yards. And to do anything beyond small logs they seemingly have money to invest in big ticket items that I don't like Bobcats and such. I like chainsaws because they're multipurpose, I rent my 880 out to a tree service friend when he needs it to cut up big trunks and make money off it.

All told, do I have as much invested in all my saws and milling gear as a cheap bandsaw mill? Yes, but I can do way way more with them than I could do with a bottom line $4000 bs mill. The 780/880 was only $950 new because of long story, Makita 64cc was $180 second hand, other saws are just for all purpose sawing not milling so far, mill was free, 5' extension kit $130. 72" bar was $230 plus shipping, 42" bar $120, few hundred dollars in .404 chains over time, all my lo pro bars and chains less than $500 so far.... Yard trees dependably have metal in them, spend a fortune wrecking bandsaw blades on the trees I mill. Plus you'd want $150 carbide tipped blades for mesquite, live oak, and pecan. I switched to lo pro because everything I mill is the hardest of American hardwoods and people milling cherry, walnut, sycamore, etc, have no clue what it's like to mill wood that is 2-3x as hard as those. Easy to get blade wander and poor results on any of these woods with a cheap bandsaw mill. I've tried resawing 6-12" mesquite with a 3hp vertical bandsaw and $40 Timber Wolf blades go dull almost instantly, won't cut straight to save their lives. I go thru 12" mesquite with sharp lo pro chain at least at 20 seconds a foot, perfect results. So yeah, all those reasons and a few more.... Milling softwood dimensional lumber to build a house with? Hell yeah, I'd get a bandsaw mill. All a matter of what your needs and situation is.

 

[sean donato]

No, the opposite, really, milling in a city. Live in a residential neighborhood in a rental house can't really run a bandsaw operation in. Don't have the gear to transport and lift large logs on to it. So my portability is about being able to salvage trees onsite in other people's yards around the city. Often they're in backyards w little gates and there's no moving the logs til they're milled. Sometimes like with the sycamore in my neighborhood I hauled down the street or a mesquite that's not too big I can load it on my truck and get it back to my house. I do personal milling for my own needs, so investing in an HD trailer/log arch, forklift, 30" capable bandsaw, etc, just not in the cards right now. Like to keep things simple and invest in no more than I need to do what I do. Someday when I get around to building my family a house on a large family property I'll get a bandsaw mill. I see the work small bandsaw mills are doing in the little towns outside of here, and yeah, way easier, great results, etc, but they have a lot of property and room to make a big mess of their yards. And to do anything beyond small logs they seemingly have money to invest in big ticket items that I don't like Bobcats and such. I like chainsaws because they're multipurpose, I rent my 880 out to a tree service friend when he needs it to cut up big trunks and make money off it.

All told, do I have as much invested in all my saws and milling gear as a cheap bandsaw mill? Yes, but I can do way way more with them than I could do with a bottom line $4000 bs mill. The 780/880 was only $950 new because of long story, Makita 64cc was $180 second hand, other saws are just for all purpose sawing not milling so far, mill was free, 5' extension kit $130. 72" bar was $230 plus shipping, 42" bar $120, few hundred dollars in .404 chains over time, all my lo pro bars and chains less than $500 so far.... Yard trees dependably have metal in them, spend a fortune wrecking bandsaw blades on the trees I mill. Plus you'd want $150 carbide tipped blades for mesquite, live oak, and pecan. I switched to lo pro because everything I mill is the hardest of American hardwoods and people milling cherry, walnut, sycamore, etc, have no clue what it's like to mill wood that is 2-3x as hard as those. Easy to get blade wander and poor results on any of these woods with a cheap bandsaw mill. I've tried resawing 6-12" mesquite with a 3hp vertical bandsaw and $40 Timber Wolf blades go dull almost instantly, won't cut straight to save their lives. I go thru 12" mesquite with sharp lo pro chain at least at 20 seconds a foot, perfect results. So yeah, all those reasons and a few more.... Milling softwood dimensional lumber to build a house with? Hell yeah, I'd get a bandsaw mill. All a matter of what your needs and situation is.

I was mainly just wondering, you're going through a lot of grief we don't. Makes sense if you don't have the space, or equipment to handle moving larger logs.
I guess cheap is a sliding scale. Cousins mill was built local at an Amish fab shop. We made it portable. Has extra rails set up that we can hook up off the back of the trailer, level and go. It's a pretty nice set up. Only downside imo is it has a 37hp gas engine on it and it's a hog. Should have came with a diesel. mesquite wouldn't phase the mill or get blade drift.
It's a far cry from my wife's grandfather woodmizer but it's been very good and portable has its benefits. Bad pic of it, the head is trapped up behind the truck. The roof sticking out covers the track for the Woodmizer.
Also assuming everyone with a bandsaw is milling soft wood isn't wise.