How to build a folding sawbuck

[Snap]

Thought I'd resurrect this to get some opinions on the location of the upper horizontal braces (doen 2" from the tops of legs) on the original plan.
Do their locations near the tops of the legs hinder cutting within the sawbuck?

There was a very similar plan that seemed to have those upper horizontals much lower so I wondered if perhaps lowering the upper braces might help in that respect.
(grampa's super sawbuck, copyrighted )

Any opinions?

 

[Philbert]

All of my horizontal cross bracing (plywood) is below the pivot point to clear the saw. They are actually placed to butt against the upright from the other side, holding it open at a set angle.

Philbert

 

[Snap]

All of my horizontal cross bracing (plywood) is below the pivot point to clear the saw. They are actually placed to butt against the upright from the other side, holding it open at a set angle.

Philbert

Thanks but I was referring to the plan at the beginning of the thread. It requires horizontals above the pivot to support the partial length upprights.

You have a good idea but I'm already committed to some variant of the original plan.
I want to leave it outdoors and plywood doesn't last more than a few seasons outside around here.

 

[Philbert]

Thanks . . . You have a good idea but I'm already committed to some variant of the original plan.

No problems. Both the 'original' plan, and 'Grandpa's' have those cross braces, and per your original question, yes, lower is better. You will see the log hanging off the end to be cut in the original plan, and 'Grandpa' stacking his wood high to avoid these braces. But in Grandpa's later plans, he also has the clear uprights to let you cut in between them. The advantage of making your own is that you get to make it your own!

I made my sawbucks to fold, so they don't stay outside, and out of free or scrap materials, so even if they get cut, or only last a few years, they are easy to replace.

Please post photos of your build when finished.

Philbert

 

[Snap]

I guess another pair of legs would allow moving the upper braces down to or below the pivot.
Seems more functional up top but six feet are less likely to all sit on uneven ground as well as four feet.

 

[Snap]

No great shakes....Like the original plan with dropped upper braces with the thoughts of allowing inside cuts too.
Seems like it will work.

Tried to extend the bottoms of the movable inner uprights down and moving the upper horizontal braces down to hold them from below the pivot point to really free up the inner areas for cutting, but it turned out to make poor alignment at the tops of the uprights due to the natural variable wows of each of the pieces.

Also I am thinking that ropes might make better ties at the base rather than chains to allow a bit of movement of the legs to accommodate uneven ground. Having the fixed chain lengths with no give makes for a bit of rocking at times.

 

[Philbert]

Very nice looking!

You mentioned outdoor exposure - what type of wood is that? Did you consider any diagonal bracing to prevent 'racking'?

Philbert

 

[Snap]

Very nice looking!
You mentioned outdoor exposure - what type of wood is that? Did you consider any diagonal bracing to prevent 'racking'?
Philbert

It's untreated doug-fir but the fresh cuts have all been painted to try to protect the more vulnerable surfaces.
I figured it was a learning experience version and can one day be kindling.
PT would be heavy to lug around and it's frowned upon in our locality now. There is no local disposal of the stuff anymore, so once it's bought it's on the property forever.
I hadn't thought of it but there is a native lumber mill a few miles up the road that might have something suitable for next time.

It hasn't had a test run yet but it would be easy enough to add a couple more horizontals below the pivot to steady it up if needed. Also, snugging up the legs against the dowel using plate washers on the dowels and pins through the dowel would probably help in that respect.

 

[Hinerman]

Thought I'd resurrect this to get some opinions on the location of the upper horizontal braces (doen 2" from the tops of legs) on the original plan.
Do their locations near the tops of the legs hinder cutting within the sawbuck? Any opinions?

Yes, I see no possible way to cut logs on top of this saw buck. It is designed to hold logs only with the intention of cutting the portion of the log hanging over the side of the saw buck.

 

[kyle1!]

Just move those 2..2x4 horizontal braces on top down farther on the angled pieces and remember that only a certain size log can be used inside without cutting into the stand.

 

[Snap]

I think it may work as it's shown with a bit of care cutting.
I'm picturing a pile of limbs in the cradle.

The top horizontals don't want to go much lower because then they will act like they did when they were tried under the pivots. The natural bows of the uprights get accentuated when they hang farther past the horizontal supports and may not provide anticipated support.
Ideal alignment of all the uprights happens using the original plan with the horizontals at the very top with no overhang of the uprights, but then I really don't see any cutting inside between the outer pairs of legs.

PS: Thanks for the idea Brad.

 

[Wood Doctor]

Nice design, but why make it fold? The volume savings seems rather minimal. Rigidity and strength at the crossing joints and laterally seems far more important. I could make an identical but non-folding cross buck as shown by OP that's much more rigid with only 8 pieces and fasteners. It would be strong as an ox and even weigh less.

 

[Philbert]

Nice design, but why make it fold?

Mine folds for storage in the garage, when not needed; to make it easier to carry to other parts of the yard; and to throw in the back of the station wagon when cutting somewhere else. Probably not an important feature if you have a permanent wood cutting area or shed.

Philbert

 

[Wood Doctor]

Mine folds for storage in the garage, when not needed; to make it easier to carry to other parts of the yard; and to throw in the back of the station wagon when cutting somewhere else. Probably not an important feature if you have a permanent wood cutting area or shed.

Philbert

Strength and rigidity seem more important to me regardless. I seldom move mine and usually I can strap it above the load of wood in the truck. And, with just 8 pieces with still a triple cross, I can also make it lighter in weight.

 

[Philbert]

Strength and rigidity seem more important to me regardless . . . . And, with just 8 pieces with still a triple cross, I can also make it lighter in weight.

Mine is rock solid with the plywood (photos in Posts #35 and 37) - like 'unitized construction'. Works for me. But I would love to also see photos of yours!

Philbert

 

[Snap]

Mine is rock solid with the plywood (photos in Posts #35 and 37) - like 'unitized construction'. Works for me. But I would love to also see photos of yours!
Philbert

Plywood sheathing makes very rigid construction.
We use plywood shearwalls to brace buildings and it is a very efficient solution structurally.

 

[Snap]

I like the folding aspect just for the fact that it makes it easy to get a shoulder under it to move it around.

 

[Wood Doctor]

Mine is rock solid with the plywood (photos in Posts #35 and 37) - like 'unitized construction'. Works for me. But I would love to also see photos of yours!

Philbert

Well, I built a new 2-crossbar sawbuck last fall that only used 6 pieces, and it's really strong. A 3-crossbar unit would simply add two more pieces and require longer horizontal connecting rails.

The secret to strength and lightness is the joinery. The rails must lock together with the uprights using dadoes cut into both the uprights and the rails about 5/8" deep. The outer ends of the rails project out about 1" beyond the uprights. This requires some accurately cut notches using a stacked dado blade and several passes. Screws and glue tie it all together.

One enhancement I like about OP's sawbuck is that he tapered the top ends of the uprights. That increases log capacity without any significant loss in strength. I have no choice but to pirate that idea. And, I have always dropped the rails below the top V, otherwise they are in the way. The notched joinery reduces the number of rails from four to two.

 

[Philbert]

Well, I built a new 2-crossbar sawbuck last fall that only used 6 pieces, and it's really strong.

Pictures!!! We need pictures!!!

The secret to strength and lightness is the joinery. The rails must lock together with the uprights using dadoes cut into both the uprights and the rails about 5/8" deep. The outer ends of the rails project out about 1" beyond the uprights.

Photos!!! Illustrations!!! Graphics!!!

And, I have always dropped the rails below the top V, otherwise they are in the way. The notched joinery reduces the number of rails from four to two.

Seriously, I would love to see your design and detail mentioned. Mine were knocked together pretty quickly, with just a little care in alignment, from scrap materials, as I figure that they will get nicked, cut, exposed to the elements, etc. I did not even bother to stain or seal them, which would be a simple thing to extend their useful life. But they spend most of their time indoors, and just left out in the elements occassionally.

I left the bottoms of the feet 'pointy', instead of mitering them flat, because I expect them to mostly sit on soil or grass, and this might help keep them from moving. But they work fine on pavement as well.

Philbert

 

[Snap]