full skip vs. frozen wood

[earache]

Anyone else have much experience cutting frozen wood with full skip? It sucks. I am not trying to start another drawn out argument between skip and comp, just stating how poorly it cuts in comparison to full comp in the frozen stuff. I have already posted times comparing both, so see that thread if interested. In case you haven't cut with it in frozen, I wouldn't.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Wow, unique observation, and something to test present imagined models of understanding against.

Have you tried ruling out adjusting depth gauges? It seems to me that any chain would incur more resistance incurring frozen wood and it's dryness too, and that perhaps less 'load' should be metered to the 'knives'.

He!!, i live in Florida, it's just a thought!

 

[Tony Snyder]

My feeling is that semi skip or full skip only have a place in large diameter softwood where long bars are required.

It cuts slower and vibrates like heck in hardwood and frozen wood. It also has no place on short bars.

If your saw is suitably sized I would go with .325 Carlton semichisel, if not at least 3/8ths semichisel. It seems like the semichisel cuts a little longer in frozen wood. Brand won't make that much difference as long as you stay with the name brands.

The semichisel is also a little more forgiving on hand sharpening.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

We cut frozen hardwood all winter and perfer full chisel, skip chain on the saws 25" and longer.
We may lose cutting time on the smaller stuff, that's made up in the bigger stuff. Throw on a bigger rim and the advantage headace and snyder talk about is reduced. Then take away the time they spend sharpening all those teeth, and the skip tooth starts to look even better.
I would be very surprised if one could tell, in a blind test, the difference between cutting frozen and thawed wood. I can't.

 

[Tony Snyder]

Mike we can usually tell when someone has been cutting wood that was water soaked then frozen by the fact that the chain does no stay sharp as long.

If you think skip cuts a smooth as full comp, more power to you. That has not been my experience. Use what you think is best.

We did do some halfway controlled test several years back with full chisel vs semichisel Oregon. The semichisel took less filing work in the frozen downed wood. Now this was wood down about six months, rained on and then frozen to about 15 degrees. It was hardwoods , red oak, ash, hickory.
There was a noticible but not huge difference.

 

[earache]

What I mean by sucks is this. It cuts slower, vibrates alot more, and since there are half as many cutters, gets dull twice as fast as full comp, especially in frozen red oak. Tony, its a Walkerized 372, and I also have a full comp chain for it. Both the full skip and full comp are semi-chisel, 3/8. I also have a 28" bar for it that I run full skip on. The full skip is much easier to sharpen.

 

[bwalker]

IMO skip chain stinks for the wood we have in MI. This is with 24" bars and hardwoods. Skip may have a place, but its west of the Mississippi.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

'Stihl Phil' our loco-all District Dude for Stihl, and all around good guy, tells it like that in full comp 1 tooth peels a veneer of wood from the kerf and several teeth behind it might dice it a lil, but do actual less cutting. And he got me to use/respect the skip serieses for longer bars, saying it cleared better than all that other going on as above, with less drag according to Stihl,and also less knife edges to maintain.

Makes sense to me that at a higher speed, you could kinda 'hydroplane' / skip more smoothly from tooth to tooth if there is more of them. And that frozen wood would be harder to pierce, in fact i beleive it takes a diffrent depth gauge setting, to expose less tooth (higher depth gauge), so as to put less of the tougher cutting/frozen woods load on each tooth. Also that frozen wood would be drier, have less nature-all lubricant, and that pounding the hard ice crystals with the knives, with more friction (less lubrication) would seem to wear/age the tooth faster.

Which makes me wonder, if a full skip's depth gauge's could be dropped further, to take a bigger bite, due to less available power from the motor going to working the extra knives that would be on a full house chain? Then it would cut even better?

 

[bwalker]

Treespyder, Read the Art Martin thread Will the real logger please stand up. It will become apparent that your stihl guys is wrong.

 

[glens]

¿apparent?

Ben,

As much as I can recall, there is a lack of authoritative clarity about this in that thread.  Since the thread is so very huge and multi-topical it's difficult to digest it all.  Perhaps you'd be so kind as to distill it to the concept you have in mind.  This is a perfect little out of the way place to do that.

Thanks,
Glen

 

[bwalker]

Glens, Reread the thread. Art states multiple times that full comp is faster. He also explains why.

 

[Art Martin]

After reading the post on fullskip vs. frozen wood thread dated 1-08-03, I am bowing out of this thread because apparently I lack “authoritative clarity” about chains. I think that the author of that post should continue in my place as he apparently has an abundance of “authoritative clarity” on every subject. I don’t want my lowly, baseless opinions to interfere with his ”authoritative clarity”. I will let that author submit his mathematical measurements of the critical angles required for completing a finished racing chain. He can also throw in some honing advice and probably share his vast knowledge of files too.

Art Martin

 

[Gypo Logger]

Hi Art, do Glen a favour and send him the Walt Galer "Special", It came real close to my round filing, but Rotax rocked it out before Dennis could get at it, then I round filed it when I was 3 sheets to the wind, then I sent it to Ken Dunn, now you own it. Its prolly the only chain that has been in 52 states and 7 provinces and 2 Territories.
Huh huh heh heh eh!

 

[Onthehillintn]

If the skip chain is so fast then why not take it to the next level?
Grind all the cutters off but 2. (one left and one right) Now that you have aprox. 1/32 of the cutters left you dont need a 125cc
motor. You only need 3.91cc. I don't think anyone makes one that small so just get a wild thing. Since you're still way over powered
just grind the depth gauges completly off. Now you're ready to make some chips.

 

[Gypo Logger]

My sentiments exactly Winchester Kid. I'm originally from Edmonton Kentucky.
You hit the nail right on the head. The more cutters, the more smoother the cut, thus, the less vibration.
Daniel Boone (I guess thats where Booneville Kentucky came from). There is also a Booneville N.Y., so I guess he was over there too.
Daniel Boone
P.S. sorry Fish, there is also a Booneville Arkansas, and a Booneville Miss.
Sheesh! Now I'm a freakin'
Geographer

 

[Gypo Logger]

Hi everyone, I really dont think Glen is being deliberately confrontational. He appears to learn faster by going to the "horses mouth", thus circumventing conventional learning processes.
Approaching things from this angle may get ones toes stepped on. It's actually a left handed compliment, and thats a good thing.
I guess what I am trying to say, is that there are lots of ways to learn things the hard way, and we have all done that.
John

 

[glens]

Art, I don't know if you'll see this now, but I'll give it a shot anyway.

I neither claim to have, nor recall stating, any opinion whatsoever on construction or finishing of racing chains.  In fact, I'm fairly certain I publicly acknowledged my understanding that you are at, or at least very near, the top of the totem pole, or kingship of the hill (as it were), in that area.  Several times over.  I have no first-hand knowledge of that, however, so it should be evidence that I can accept other's opinions as valid.

I have detected in you a great generosity, a kind disposition, and a warm sense of humor.  I am not actively trying to see any qualities from the opposite side of your spectrum and am somewhat surprised by what's happened here on the forum.

In this present thread, I noted mention of an explanation regarding saw chain cutter activity in the cut.  As you're aware, that subject has been on my mind recently.  That's why my interest in this thread.  I rarely get into anything where chip removal would be handled better by a chain of lesser complement, so even trying one has never interested me.  I know how much smoother in the cut a .325 chain is compared to 3/8 in the hardwoods I typically encounter, so I have no reason to think that yet fewer cutters would be alluring.

The particular aspect I was referring to above, as having a "lack of authoritative clarity" pertains specifically to the action of the cutters.&nbsp; In your other thread you'd offered <a href="http://www.arboristsite.com/attachment.php?postid=65550">this image</a> (guidebar.jpg - 158 KB) which depicts three states of "tune" of a cutter.&nbsp; I had some questions about it, and I guess I'd cluttered them by stating my understanding of why that image was unclear to me.&nbsp; In your response at http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?postid=65680#post65680 you said:<blockquote>"I felt that it was appropriate for people to see how the depth gauge controls the size of the chips as is clearly illustrated in this drawing. I certainly do not intend to duplicate, challenge or spend time obtaining the measurements that you submitted in your post. I just don?t understand what you were getting at. I do however think you missed the point since the optimum cutting angle and chip size is clearly illustrated at the front portion of each drawing as the tooth raises up from the bar."</blockquote>I don't want to get argumentative with you, but I do want to make it clear that I don't find the clarity in that illustration in respect to indication of chip size or how the first and last "optimum angle"s can both represent the same thing, as they are seemingly being portrayed to do.&nbsp; I would be elated to have you relate to me your understanding of what is meant by "optimum angle and original chip size" and "original chain efficiency".&nbsp; You clearly feel I'm wrong in my understanding yet you do not offer the alternative to me.&nbsp; Please consider this as a request for that information.

In addition to those concepts, or at least particularly, if they're the same, it would be great to know what you were referring to in http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?postid=65793#post65793 where you'd said:<blockquote>"The depth gauge stops this continuous function [operating in "attack" mode] and limits the chain to a multitude of small ?bites?"</blockquote>and in http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?postid=65942#65942 with:<blockquote>"It seems to me that you are trying to disprove long established and proven facts."</blockquote>I feel you've misunderstood me and my intentions.&nbsp; I'm merely curious and seek clarification on these issues in my desire to intimately understand saw chain dynamics.&nbsp; Regarding your first quote, I do not understand how the depth gauge causes the cutter to fall out of the cut in the active way you seem to be suggesting.&nbsp; Regarding the second quote, well, so far that seems to be purely coincidental, to whatever extent it's valid.

I was truly hoping Ben would offer me his perspective on what you'd said, but I'd much rather hear it directly from you if possible.&nbsp; Please consider it, Art.&nbsp; But if you decline, please don't leave on my account.

Glen

---
John, I truly appreciate your expressed thoughts.&nbsp; Thank you.

 

[Marky Mark]

Open mouth insert FOOT

As I have claimed I know nothing about logging, tree cutting or for that matter the the tree industry. I do enjoy cutting trees or bucking firewood as a hobby. There is something I do understand, "when someone is speaking listen" Art has many more years in the logging, timber whatever you want call it industry. But when some of you guys can achieve this

http://www.arboristsite.com/attachment.php?postid=40743

Then you can debate him. From what I have been told by his friends this is the real deal he himself is divulging for us to learn. From what I have read Art is 76 Give or take, his father was a logger, lets say he started learning about this trade at 10 years old. If you read the whole post. Thats 66 years to learn and understand this whole chain concept.

Just as he is getting into the heart of the order you blow it. I hope you can humble yourself and apoligize for being an ASS.All that knowledge from years of love and you screwed it up in a matter of minutes.

When this picture was taken where were you? in your dads shop helping him file????

You Better find away to toss his SALAD.

 

[Crofter]

In a previous post I said somethlng to the effect of " Wouldn't it be nice to have a slow motion video of a chain in action" The aspects required to make an efficient cutting operation is much easier to visualise and understand when the cutter and material is in a fixed relationship as in a wood plane or a lathe. We can watch it work. With a chainsaw chain we are pulling the cutter along on a fluttering chain burried in a log, immersed in sawdust, and travelling 80 feet a second. The cutter and the material do not remain in a fixed relationship. The factory chain is a workable compromise of cutting angles, cuttter profiles, cutting edge clearance angles and presentation angles. Variations can be beneficial if you want to optomise for specific conditions. Art gave a list of many things that can influence the operation. He knows exactly what is necessary to make a chain cut very fast. To ask that he also be a linguistic and mathematical genuis is pretty harsh demands. I am satisfied that if Art says it is shi t, I ain't gonna taste it to try to prove him wrong! There is lots more I want to know about filing and cutting.

Learn from others mistakes: you don't live long enough to make them all yourself.

Frank

 

[jokers]

Hope Art is reading this thread now

Hi Art, I too would like to express my admiration and appreciation for the hard won knowledge that you have gained, and then freely shared with those of us who frequent this board. As many others have stated before me, we realize that most of this information could never be calculated mathematically, it could only be derived from a keen understanding of how things work, and then possibly a dose of mathematics, and then the trial by fire, sustained winning results against world class competitors. I know that a couple of guys have appeared to verbally challenge some of your statements, and in fact may have been, but that is only a reflection on their inability to immediately comprehend what you were saying. I don`t think you could find anyone here who could genuinely challenge your ability or knowledge relative to race chain building Art, and for the guys who appear to be challenging you, don`t reply to them, let them read and reread your posts and eventually they will catch on. I agree with Gypo that Glens was probably not trying to challenge you, he was probably just trying to make your information fit concepts that he is comfortable with. Being men(well mostly) we are all ruffians of sorts and often lack the social polish of good written communication skills, and we often communicate messages that we did not intend. Normally I can only speak for myself but in this case I can sense the unanimous agreement that we feel lucky to have you posting here. Thanks Art. Russ