Which is better for hardwoods

[moody]

So are you trying to say that I should send my saw to one porter for horsepower, then send it to the next porter to get the torque put back into it?

Most guys who port saws actually port more work saws than the cookie cutters we see vids of. There's a big difference between built to work 10hour days and make 10 second cookies. I ported my 350 got more torque but it won't cut cookies near as fast as mweba's 350 but it works for me. I guess to keep this short chain speed wins no matter what size wood.

 

[deye223]

If you port your saws, you loose too much torque when you increase horsepower. Best to keep em stock and keep the torque. opcorn:

i'm calling BS on this :msp_confused:

that depends on who does the port work

i'm with you on this one :agree2:

i think the most important thig in cutting hardwood is a sharp chain

and this go's without saying. :msp_thumbsup:

 

[Trx250r180]

The egg came before the chicken.....

 

[rdtreewalker]

There are several variables that play into the op's question. Are we talking about a work saw or cookie cutting saw. What length of bar, what size chain. What type of hardwood, oak, locust, hedge. The size of the tree, is it green or dry. As others have said , a sharp chain and chain speed play a large factor.

 

[madhatte]

I still like turtles.

 

[Rudolf73]

I still like turtles.

Turtles are pretty cool... :monkey:



No wait :turtle:

 

[Blazin]

I like tater tots.....and a sharp chain

 

[scallywag]

Hmmm...There is hardwood then there is HARD wood, i'll go with torque.

 

[mountainlake]

Torque, no love for the smaller high rpm Huskys with no torque.. If you can keep everything perfect they'll cut, perfect RPM, perfect sharp chain. Steve

 

[mountainlake]

Looks like no votes for the high rpm, low torque Huskys yet. Steve

 

[beerbelly]

Back when I was a car guy, we would always put it this way. HP makes and keeps the car going fast, torque is what crushes you back in the seat when you bury the gas pedal in the floor. I am sure for chainsaws it is much the same, HP makes the saw scream at 14,000 rpms, torque does the cutting when it is buried in a log. It is a combo of both, but I'm going with torque is better for cutting.

Torque is also described as a twisting motion. i.e. beer caps!!! Waaaaaaahooooooo! Torque baybeeeee!

 

[beerbelly]

oh, yeah......

.....a razor sharp chain doesn't hurt either.:msp_biggrin:

 

[REJ2]

you are a master troll Space.

He's got em divided right down the middle, i see you didnt fall for it though!

 

[milkman]

We all know that 3.1416 is better.:msp_biggrin::msp_biggrin:

 

[513yj]

I drive a 12 valve cummins. 250hp and about 600 lb/ft. I'm going to have to say torque because of said bias. I've seen the 4 stroke saws and now am waiting on a diesel. I guess I can hit the gym with the NFL defensive tackles so I can lift it when it comes out :tongue2:

 

[Philip Wheelock]

Suppose it depends on a sawyer's cutting style and touch. I find that making horsepower at lower rpm's (more torque) is easier to control in hardwood, but that's just me. Gotta have enough displacement.

 

[XSKIER]

nope i can get both

want to try one?

Ok. After some Internet research I think I've found out what you're talking about.
View attachment 277467
View attachment 277468

 

[scallywag]

No chainsaw could out torque my...............mother in-law:taped:

 

[spacemule]

Torque is actually meaningless. Don't believe me? Weld a 3" bolt to a 1" thick plate of steel, get a 20 foot breaker bar and put it on the nut, and dangle off the end of the bar. If you weight 150 pounds, that's 150 x 20 = 3000 foot pounds of torque. Come back and tell me how that 3000 foot pounds works out for you. :msp_biggrin:

 

[CTYank]

If that's the case, why measure torque or rpm at all?

Because.

It's NOT the peak reading(s), but the shape of the curve(s) vs rpm.

Back when, Mark Donohue was running an advanced drivers' school, and asked about the (Traco-built) engine in his Penske Camaro vs the various Ford teams competing. Various Ford builders were claiming substantially higher peak power readings, but Mark's car was generally notably quicker at a variety of courses.

Mark said something, pointing at a graph, like that the peak reading doesn't matter much if it only covers a very narrow band. You can't camp there.

Relatively flat torque curve makes for nice, consistent, fat power curve. Why scrutinize navel?