Progressive Filing of Rakers-Stihls Opinion

Advertise with us
Treestuff
Wesspur
Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
R

RES

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
414
Reaction score
60
Location
connecticut
I sent e-mails to Stihl-USA and Stihl-UK to get an opinion on Progressive filing of chain. After many back and forth e-mails I finally got this response.

"STIHL recommends a depth gauge clearance of between 0.65 mm and 0.8 mm (.025" - .030") on most STIHL chain types. We do not recommend maintaining the depth gauges on STIHL chain as the drawings you supplied suggest. Proper chain filing tools and depth gauge maintenance tools for STIHL saw chain can be obtained from any authorized STIHL dealer.

The drawing I supplied to them was Carlton's illustration of Progressive raker filing.
 
Carlton gets really jazzed about their method and their file-o-plate as the only true way to sharpen chains, but their explanation doesn't seem to hold much water if you follow it through.

The Oregon style depth gauge tools measure down from the sharpened point of the cutter, and the difference as you file the tooth back does not seem like much. The file-o-plate measures off of the cutter in front of the depth gauge - what happens with skip tooth chain? You need a different file-o-plate for each chain pitch and type?

The Oregon tool works, and you have to have some faith and confidence in Stihl and Oregon understanding chains.

I tried the Husqvana tools, and liked them, but needed a different one for each chain type. I like having one file holder for each diameter file, and one depth gauge for each depth adjustment, regardless of chain pitch or type.

Philbert
 
Not sure what you were trying to accomplish by emailing Stihl with a Carlton filing technique... I don't understand your motive.

You gotta keep them riders at the proper depth...

Gary
 
I don't know about progressive adjustments, etc. but I do know that I have used Carlton chain with their File-O-Plate for over 25 years and as I have stated before, I can't think of a simpler, better way to sharpen chains with a file. I have the file plates for .325, .375, and .404 and find they work with a few other brands of chain as well, but not with all other brands.

The file plate does not work with skip chain and I don't think Carlton tries to make a plate to work with skip.

I have chains that have been filed so many times there is virtually no tooth left and I save those for stumps and railroad ties. I never have a chain ground as they always take too much off a chain when they sharpen by grinding.

For chains that won't work with the file plate I have a couple of different guides and depth gauges to use, but I never feel that the quality of the sharpening job is as good as I can achieve with the plate.

I do like the guide and depth gauge I got from NPA for my 1/2" pitch chains. With the gear drive saws, cutting the depth gauge down .040" is a minimum, wish I could find a depth gauge that would go lower. I usually give it an extra stroke or two without the guide once they are down to .040 just for good measure.


Mark
 
heimannm said:
I don't know about progressive adjustments, etc. but I do know that I have used Carlton chain with their File-O-Plate for over 25 years and as I have stated before, I can't think of a simpler, better way to sharpen chains with a file. I have the file plates for .325, .375, and .404 and find they work with a few other brands of chain as well, but not with all other brands.

The file plate does not work with skip chain and I don't think Carlton tries to make a plate to work with skip.

I have chains that have been filed so many times there is virtually no tooth left and I save those for stumps and railroad ties. I never have a chain ground as they always take too much off a chain when they sharpen by grinding.

For chains that won't work with the file plate I have a couple of different guides and depth gauges to use, but I never feel that the quality of the sharpening job is as good as I can achieve with the plate.

I do like the guide and depth gauge I got from NPA for my 1/2" pitch chains. With the gear drive saws, cutting the depth gauge down .040" is a minimum, wish I could find a depth gauge that would go lower. I usually give it an extra stroke or two without the guide once they are down to .040 just for good measure.


Mark
Click to expand...

The Supply Cache has depth gauges to .060.

http://www.firecache.com/prodinfo.asp?number=75.1010
 
By contacting Stihl and Oregon, I was trying to find out how they felt about Carlton's theory that the chain tooth pivots about its back edge as it engages the wood resulting in the need to provide more raker depth as the tooth is filed back. It seems to me that there are other factors to consider such as chain tension, length of bar, etc. No one seems to want to provide this analysis.
 
If I have just sharpened a chain and it is not cutting very fast like it should, I know the rakers need to come down a bit.

Or I can use a depth guage tool and see they are a bit high or OK.

For soft wood, the rakers can be lower. For hard wood, if the rakers are too low, the saw will kind of buck.

So closer to factory specs for hard wood, a bit lower than that for softer wood.
 
RES said:
By contacting Stihl and Oregon, I was trying to find out how they felt about Carlton's theory that the chain tooth pivots about its back edge as it engages the wood resulting in the need to provide more raker depth as the tooth is filed back. It seems to me that there are other factors to consider such as chain tension, length of bar, etc. No one seems to want to provide this analysis.
Click to expand...

Guys!

As I stated in a previous post, I have become a believer in the progressive method. Here is a YT video link showing the chains rocking back into the cut. Everything seems to hinge on this process (pun intended!). Take a look, and let's hear your comments...



From around 1:50 you'll see the rocking of the cutter happening prominently...Obviously, for the sake of the video, the cut was advanced very slowly, so as to keep the chain near the surface of the wood for good visibility. This means that the phenomenon is happening all the time, and not just on every 2nd or third cutter....

P.S. If you play back the video at 25% speed, you can really see the cutting action and the chip forming! Enjoy!
 
Mike Kunte said:
Guys!

As I stated in a previous post, I have become a believer in the progressive method. Here is a YT video link showing the chains rocking back into the cut. Everything seems to hinge on this process (pun intended!). Take a look, and let's hear your comments...



From around 1:50 you'll see the rocking of the cutter happening prominently...Obviously, for the sake of the video, the cut was advanced very slowly, so as to keep the chain near the surface of the wood for good visibility. This means that the phenomenon is happening all the time, and not just on every 2nd or third cutter....

P.S. If you play back the video at 25% speed, you can really see the cutting action and the chip forming! Enjoy!
Click to expand...
That's awesome Mile.
I always wanted to see that. That's a first for me. I can't slow it down but I flipped my phone upside down and concentrated on the gap between the bar and the front of the cutter chassis. Really not much for porposing to start off as it was met with little resistance in the bark. Much Like I think it would be with a race chain with little hooks filed beyond it's pivot. You would be left with a very narrow kerf and a much faster chain speed = greater centrifugal force. Sometimes after the chip broke out then the heel would become air borne at the same as the front. (much like the Carlton illustrations that @hannes69 posted)
There will be many variables that will alter the 'attack mode' I believe there to be a big difference in behaviour from the middle of the bar compared to the ends.
The length and shape of the bar will play a big role. A belly bar will give you more even tension.
Thanks again
 
I always believed in the "porpoise" theory (where three or four cutters leave the bar) until seeing this video. That's when I realised that the "rocking" or "pivoting" cutter is correct. Carlton was really onto something here. Makes complete sense now, and supports the 6 to 7 degree angle created by the progressive method.
 
Would be interesting to see the same video of the same chain with the cutter filed back beyond the center of the rivet, which is the actual pivot point of the tooth. My money is on the cutter actually diving downward vs. 'attacking' as Carlton also claimed would be the case after reaching such a point in cutter's useful life.

Very Cool, Mike. Thanks for taking the time and posting the vid. Should almost be mandatory for it to be included in Hannes' thread as well considering all the theoretical discussion tossed around over there. LOL
 
PogoInTheWoods said:
Would be interesting to see the same video of the same chain with the cutter filed back beyond the center of the rivet, which is the actual pivot point of the tooth. My money is on the cutter actually diving downward vs. 'attacking' as Carlton also claimed would be the case after reaching such a point in cutter's useful life.

Very Cool, Mike. Thanks for taking the time and posting the vid. Should almost be mandatory for it to be included in Hannes' thread as well considering all the theoretical discussion tossed around over there. LOL
Click to expand...

Hey, Pogo!
PogoInTheWoods said:
Would be interesting to see the same video of the same chain with the cutter filed back beyond the center of the rivet, which is the actual pivot point of the tooth. My money is on the cutter actually diving downward vs. 'attacking' as Carlton also claimed would be the case after reaching such a point in cutter's useful life.

Very Cool, Mike. Thanks for taking the time and posting the vid. Should almost be mandatory for it to be included in Hannes' thread as well considering all the theoretical discussion tossed around over there. LOL
Click to expand...

Hey, Pogo!

I think the point Carlton was making was that the worn cutter will actually tip "away" from the cut when the constant depth gauge method is used. In order to overcome this problem, they recommend the progressive method.

Hope this makes sense!

Mike
 
RES said:
By contacting Stihl and Oregon, I was trying to find out how they felt about Carlton's theory that the chain tooth pivots about its back edge as it engages the wood resulting in the need to provide more raker depth as the tooth is filed back. It seems to me that there are other factors to consider such as chain tension, length of bar, etc. No one seems to want to provide this analysis.
Click to expand...
It's only been 2017 that Stihl released FL1 to FL5 carlton was way ahead of everyone in 1968 when Ray Carlton filed patent.
RES said:
By contacting Stihl and Oregon, I was trying to find out how they felt about Carlton's theory that the chain tooth pivots about its back edge as it engages the wood resulting in the need to provide more raker depth as the tooth is filed back. It seems to me that there are other factors to consider such as chain tension, length of bar, etc. No one seems to want to provide this analysis.
Click to expand...
Carlton was way ahead of everyone in 1968 when Ray patent his progressive depth gauges. I make my own gauges also
 
Philbert said:
Carlton gets really jazzed about their method and their file-o-plate as the only true way to sharpen chains, but their explanation doesn't seem to hold much water if you follow it through.

The Oregon style depth gauge tools measure down from the sharpened point of the cutter, and the difference as you file the tooth back does not seem like much. The file-o-plate measures off of the cutter in front of the depth gauge - what happens with skip tooth chain? You need a different file-o-plate for each chain pitch and type?

The Oregon tool works, and you have to have some faith and confidence in Stihl and Oregon understanding chains.

I tried the Husqvana tools, and liked them, but needed a different one for each chain type. I like having one file holder for each diameter file, and one depth gauge for each depth adjustment, regardless of chain pitch or type.

Philbert
Click to expand...
I wouldn't use Oregon chain any more if it was free. Used to be good but it is made in china now, you spend all your time retightening it as it stretches so much, get a Stihl chain and you will love it.
 

Similar threads

E
Measuring raker depth
Replies
4
Views
2K
ericm979
E
IntegrityCarpentry
Help with using Stihl USG
Replies
2
Views
1K
user 188535
U
IntegrityCarpentry
Anyone had manufacturing defect in stihl or pferd 2 in 1?
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
sean donato
sean donato
C
Anyone familiar with this gauge and how to use it?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
5K
Husky77
Husky77
M
My Sharpening Journey
Replies
12
Views
4K
fields_mj
F

Latest posts

Back
Top