Eight Different Chain Sharpeners Tested

[Philbert]

It amazes me how many folks will assume that because there’s a yt video, the guy in it must know what he’s doing.

I have liked some of his other chainsaw videos.

Say, I found an LED that I could install in the 511A by simply drilling a 1" dia. hole in the plastic that conceals the bulb. Forstner bit did the trick. It sticks out only a 1/4". Man oh man, is that thing bright now! My eyes are in heaven.

Please share that in the '511A Improvements' thread? Include some photos and details for guys who would like to copy? Thanks: good lighting really makes a difference!
https://www.arboristsite.com/community/threads/511a-grinder-improvements-tweaks.197073/
Philbert

 

[Timber MacFallen]

I think some of the folks here are being a bit hard on Project Farm or expecting a bit too much. Every week he puts in a lot of effort to test everything from motor oil to vacuums to saw blades. Sometimes it's very easy to give everyone equal treatment and conditions and user error plays a minimal factor and other times it can be challenging.

The key thing to remember with this guy is that he always reads the instructions, does exactly what a manufacturer recommends and does his best to be consistent and even handed. His results and what he achieved are probably realistic for what an average person might achieve without much experience.

I think it's fair to say that an expert can learn to make almost any tool work well. Whether that's Eddie Van Halen playing great with a $50 guitar from a thrift shop, or a veteran logger making a super sharp chain with a cheap $2 file from China. In this case, I think we learned that having an expensive electric grinder doesn't automatically equal super sharp chains without experience. Likewise, even a beginner can match the out of the box sharpness of a new chain with a basic Stihl 2 in 1.

 

[huskihl]

beginner can match the out of the box sharpness of a new chain with a basic Stihl 2 in 1

And that would’ve been a great name for the vid.

 

[WI_Hedgehog]

I like he went about it in the most scientific way a guy who has a full-time career, wife, and farm to maintain could realistically accomplish testing that the average person could understand and have a shot at replicating with ONE of the sharpeners.

 

[Philbert]

I think some of the folks here are being a bit hard on Project Farm or expecting a bit too much. Every week he puts in a lot of effort to test everything from motor oil to vacuums to saw blades. Sometimes it's very easy to give everyone equal treatment and conditions and user error plays a minimal factor and other times it can be challenging.

The key thing to remember with this guy is that he always reads the instructions, does exactly what a manufacturer recommends and does his best to be consistent and even handed. His results and what he achieved are probably realistic for what an average person might achieve without much experience.

I can't agree with you on this. And, for at least the third time in this thread, I will state that I generally like his reviews, but he blew it with this.

I could make a video with a guy who never used a firearm, and have him shoot a pistol, a rifle, and a shotgun, all at the SAME target, and from the SAME distance, while blindfolded to eliminate any bias, and claim that the test was 'objective'! I would count the number of holes in the target and use this to declare one 'The Best Gun!'. It would be meaningless, and even misleading.

Why are his results so different between trials? Why does he get such different results from similar tools? Is he evaluating the sharpening tools or the instructions? Is fastest time through wood that most chainsaw users would not cut a good indicator of 'the best' sharpener? He is making that declaration, not 'Here are some random tests I did with some stuff I was screwing around with'.

It is why I do not watch 'Wranglerstar', who usually appears to be more interested in promoting his video channel than fairly comparing items. It is why I read Consumer's Reports with a bit of skepticism: the classic being several guys who apparently never used a hammer, coming up with their ideas of what makes a good one, and using that criteria for rating the ones they found.

In this case, I think we learned that having an expensive electric grinder doesn't automatically equal super sharp chains without experience. Likewise, even a beginner can match the out of the box sharpness of a new chain with a basic Stihl 2 in 1.

Again, I can't agree with you. I have watched 'beginners' struggle with the STIHL 2-in-1 file guide, and even mess up chains with it, until given some guidance. And if Eddie Van Halen (R.I.P.) is going to come back to give them some tips on using that one, he could probably offer some pointers on the other 7 sharpeners in the video too.

Philbert

 

[Goinwheelin]

I just buy a new chain.

 

[trains]

I just sharpen a chain correctly for the wood I am cutting.

at one point I could not, I learned what I needed to do and practiced, got better at it, learned more and applied it.
used the granberg jig, great for bringing back a badly sharpened chain to some consistency to then continue to either hand file, or use a guide with a file.
used the husky roller guide, the stihl guide, the fg2 etc, all have their place for what I want to do, but also free hand file too as required.
dosent take long to pass the file over the teeth a few times and keep it nice and sharp, the small time it takes to do so is rewarded with faster cutting.

I didnt think much of his test sadly, there is more to sharpening a chain, than just hitting a tooth with a file, or grinder.
Did he re set the depth gauge each time, was the grinding wheel correctly profiled for the chain size etc, how much tooth did he have to take off to get back to a good sharp edge etc.

 

[cookies]

I used the Granberg 12v for about 5 years, starting in 1998 but gave up on it after getting the Oregon 511A disk grinder. The problem with the Granberg was (1) rather poorly made and started falling apart, (2) the grinding stones didn't last very long, (3) the chain had to be mounted on a saw bar. When you start doing this sharpening on a professional basis, longevity is rather important. The motor on the 511A is finally giving up, but it's lasted 18 years and sharpened at least a couple thousand chains. I think I'll keep the 511A and replace the motor unless Philbert talks me out of it:
View attachment 891230
Nowadays I angle the vise 5 degrees when changing sides. I call this a sway angle (port to starboard).

have you considered contacting a electric motor rewind/repair shop for a rebuild? or to get some recommendations for a different motor off their shelf that likely is better? the one near here has saved my bacon plenty of times repairing motors/starters/alternators or just selling me a better than original replacement thats less money than what the retailers sell oe for.

 

[KASH]

I have hand filed all my life I can sharpen a chain fairly well.I give my chains a working file which means good enough for cutting trees to keep up with the skidder operator.I dont care or have the time to put the teeth under a microscope and dust the feather edge of the gullet if some one else does so good for them.I have used sharpening aids over the years some good some not so good.For a person who does not sharpen chains often they are a blessing.
I watched the video and a few others by him.He must be pretty well off to buy all the equipment and products he uses for testing purposes also he must be the fastest learner in human history.it would take me a few days to completely absorb the steps to using one new sharpening tool.He had to learn all about chain saw chain and how to use them all properly in a very short period of time.
Maybe his results and methods were exactly to the Book Of Hoyle but were still fairly done I give him full credit.It would be interesting to see the same tests done done by a chain saw chain expert who was equally skilled in the use of every sharpening device.
Okay you guys have done it I gotta try the Stihl 2in 1.
Kash

 

[Woodslasher]

I just buy a new chain.

I know a logger that would just cut a new one off of a roll every time one got dull, I got 8 or so gallons of chain off of him and only 4 were shot. That being said, once I start filing a chain or start looking for a certain length/dl size chain, just cutting a new loop off of the roll in the other bay sounds better and better....

 

[Franny K]

It would be interesting to see how the few that beat the out of the box do after a few passes in his hedge apple vintage fence posts.

Skinny legs.

I am looking at attachments for my dremel tool, have the 11/64 and 3/16 stones already,

He is so fast a few complaints can be overlooked. A more real evaluation would be take two similar saws with differently sharpened chains and switch when the first one is out of gasoline or battery.

 

[Bret4207]

My Review of His Review
(took some notes along the way):

- Oregon 'universal kit' uses one file guide for all diameter files! That's a problem right off the bat. It is designed for low knowledge level users, to compete in mass market stores. Not something Oregon should be selling, IMO. But the basic design of the file guide is a classic, works with any brand or sequence of chain, and is the best choice for most people (in the right size).

- HF grinder: well, you probably know what I think about these.Works with 1/8" wheel only. 'Changed the geometry of the cutters' . DUH! If you grind with the flat side of the wheel, what do you expect the rounded and hollow ground cutting edges to look like?

- Oregon Sure Sharp (rotary). Does not address stone wear after the first few grinds. Not a bad system if you understand this issue. But results should be very similar to other rotary sharpening grinders, including the Dremel tool (not included).

- STIHL 2-in-1. First he switches the diameter of the supplied file, so he is not using it as designed, but still judging it. This popular tool is all about it's design geometry, including the file diameter. Since he had to change the file, he is probably using one designed for .325 or 3/8 pitch chain, which would also affect the depth gauge settings.

- Granberg File-N-Joint: another classic. Should get the same result as with the other file sharpeners if they are sharpening to the same angles. Ease of use and consistency could be factors. He briefly alludes to a learning curve with this tool, although, he implies that you can just quickly read through the instructions to get it properly set up. Someone could post an entire thread on the different variations of this tool!

- STIHL 12V sharpener (rotary). If he gets a different result with this than the other rotary grinders, there is something else going on.

- Granberg 12V File-N-Grind: similar issues with other rotary grinders. Might get more consistent cutters, but not 'sharper'.

- Oregon 420-120: completely different class of grinder; like including a pickup truck in a review of motorcycles. Maybe he could compare this to the HF grinder, along with others. Grinds down into the gullet, instead of achieving desired cutter shape, or matching the OEM shape he compares it to: 'geometry has changed just a little' - you think?

'Lots of ways to sharpen: everyone has to find something that works for them.' - Philbert

Unfortunately, his review does not address the advantages and limitations of each tool, searching for a 'best', and for YouTube clicks.

Philbert

Agree, a lot of people think he's a genius. I think he takes a stab at testing stuff and screws it up a lot of the time. Not on my watch list after viewing a few of his crappier "tests".

 

[Goinwheelin]

I know a logger that would just cut a new one off of a roll every time one got dull, I got 8 or so gallons of chain off of him and only 4 were shot. That being said, once I start filing a chain or start looking for a certain length/dl size chain, just cutting a new loop off of the roll in the other bay sounds better and better....

Lol. Jokes. I don’t always buy a new chain, but I try to have one new chain for each saw when I go cut just in case hit something and trash one. Also I always have a saw in the truck when I go to the mountains and I like to have a new chain on it at all times. That way if I need to clear the trail all I have to do is grab the saw and go no messing with files etc. my hand filing is ok but a new chain always cuts better than I can file.

 

[John Lyngdal]

A good portion of my professional career was designing experiments, sadly none involved chains or chainsaws.
There are so many aspects to chain sharpening that it's difficult to design an unbiased experiment. If I were to undertake a similar task I would purchase one new chain for each of the sharpening methods to be employed and perform a timed test cut with each of them. From that you can determine the baseline variability of the factory chain and any later sharpening tests results that fell within that bubble would be considered factory equivalent. One of the new chains would be assigned to a sharpening method and processed. This would mitigate the differences in chain condition prior to sharpening and go along ways to keeping the cutter length and raker depth constant. Then it would be time to burn some fuel and cut some donuts.

 

[Philbert]

There are so many aspects to chain sharpening that it's difficult to design an unbiased experiment.

As with any experiment, it would have to start with a definition of 'sharp'. I could write paragraphs on my thoughts on the subject, but cutting speed in one species of wood, with one saw, is only one indicator (and a weak one). If the experimenter had started with an objective definition of what a 'sharp' cutter looks like, he could then determine if, and how easily, he could attain that with each sharpener.

Perhaps use the OEM tooth profile as the standard / reference / goal. Each of the tools he used are capable of that. Each of them is capable of diminishing a sharp edge. He could then discuss the ease of use, the clarity of instructions, the advantages, the limitations, etc., of each, and decide which is 'The Best' in his opinion.

If you ask me, you will hear me ask something like, 'Tell me how you plan to use it?' for an answer.

Philbert

 

[Volund]

By hand, thats gonna get you a little bit further.
You want like a new chain or better in reasonable time and with an reasonable effort, learn to use a proper chain sharpener.
Cheap is gonna gett you exactly cheap.

 

[John Lyngdal]

As with any experiment, it would have to start with a definition of 'sharp'. I could write paragraphs on my thoughts on the subject, but cutting speed in one species of wood, with one saw, is only one indicator (and a weak one). If the experimenter had started with an objective definition of what a 'sharp' cutter looks like:, he could then determine if, and how easily, he could attain that with each sharpener.

Perhaps use the OEM tooth profile as the standard / reference / goal. Each of the tools he used are capable of that. Each of them is capable of diminishing a sharp edge. He could then discuss the ease of use, the clarity of instructions, the advantages, the limitations, etc., of each, and decide which is 'The Best' in his opinion.

If you ask me, you will hear me ask something like, 'Tell me how you plant to use it?' for an answer.

Philbert

Agreed. Start with new factory chains, characterize their performance by cutting donuts, then sharpen/modify them each of them with one of the file or grinding tools, cut more donuts, then examine the results.
One type of wood to limit the variables.
I don't think how the cutter looks belongs in the evaluation, it's too subjective which is why timed cutting should be the evaluation parameter.

 

[Philbert]

There are objective machinist methods and tools for comparing / measuring angles, edges, profiles, etc. Timed cuts are only one metric of ‘better’ or ‘sharper’. Edge longevity and durability are others.

Regardless of individual preferences, the ‘better’ sharpener is the one that lets the user obtain what they want, not conform to someone else’s metric. Ease of use could be another.

My key issue with the original video was that the guy did not sharpen all of the chains to the same level before performance testing. That’s where cutter profile comes in.

If a specific sharpener cannot achieve the desired cutter profile, that is an issue. But to take some chains only part of the way, after intentional dulling, is significant experimental bias.

Philbert

 

[WI_Hedgehog]

He defined a standard measure that could be used for generic evaluation purposes and understood by the common person. There's only so much that can be done in a reasonable amount of time.

We know that chain sharpening balances a surprisingly large amount of variables. A super-fast cutting chain may dull quickly resulting in less productivity and more expense, but even that depends on conditions. When sharpening we try to strike a balance: fast cutting, with a long-lasting edge, and minimal chain tooth material removal, being easy to do the sharpening, with minimal investment, preferably portable, working in all environments. You probably have several more!

He doesn't have a lab, so "close" has to count--it's not even "close" like Jarts or "close" like grenades, it's more nuclear-war "somewhere near the center of the city" type of "close." And by that I mean, "Pick a city and call it good."

 

[Drak3]

Agree, a lot of people think he's a genius. I think he takes a stab at testing stuff and screws it up a lot of the time. Not on my watch list after viewing a few of his crappier "tests".

Some of his stuff is still good and valid, it just takes some critical thinking to separate that from the bad.

Like his electric chainsaw vids, such as the battery life results in the first and second videos not being comparable because they were tested differently and how some brands, suchas Ego and Husqvarna, had their entry level products going up to bat and then the results being attributed to the brands' offerings as a whole.

But the sharpener video, as it exists now, is pretty much a load of rubbish.