- Joined
- Jul 19, 2019
- Messages
- 4,254
- Reaction score
- 8,510
Sharpening hard wood profile
- Thread starter Vintage Engine Repairs
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Free hand filing for many years you get good at keeping cutters close to the same length it's not rocket science chain is more forgiving than say a circular saw I never said perfect I said as close as humanly possible and yes true some humans have less ability at doing this than others.
No one said anything about race chain just the basics of how saw chain is designed to work if that's to much don't ever get into race chain the hrs guy's put into them is mind boggling.
You asked for tips for cutting Aussie hardwoods but you keep referencing some guy overseas who cuts basically balsa wood compared to our hardwoods.
Take your all over the place length cutter chain and cut some actual Aussie hardwood like Ironbark or Box or Grey Gum and then put a new chain on with one rub off the rakers I guarantee the new chain out cuts it lol
Don't think I'll bother giving any more factual information is a waist of my time it seems lol
No one said anything about race chain just the basics of how saw chain is designed to work if that's to much don't ever get into race chain the hrs guy's put into them is mind boggling.
You asked for tips for cutting Aussie hardwoods but you keep referencing some guy overseas who cuts basically balsa wood compared to our hardwoods.
Take your all over the place length cutter chain and cut some actual Aussie hardwood like Ironbark or Box or Grey Gum and then put a new chain on with one rub off the rakers I guarantee the new chain out cuts it lol
Don't think I'll bother giving any more factual information is a waist of my time it seems lol
No no, your time in sharing what you have / are isn’t waisted at all. It’s just hard to know what direction or who to take advice from when there is so much conflicting info all over the net, I’m sure you can appreciate that. Over a couple of tanks each time I hadn’t noticed tooth length to make a difference but that’s only a couple tanks each time so that’s not to say it doesn’t and because of what you said, it motivated me to challenge what I initially thought and test it to be able to prove myself and beliefs wrong in doing so.
As said, I will share my experience honestly and happily admit if you are spot on.
I don’t cut wood like you or others do and appreciate the difference in hardness and how that affects the end result.
I think I have a very valid point here because of the species I cut. Some one from Australia does not have that many woods that I do not cut. I have weeks where as I cut plenty of Eucalyptus dried and with plenty of sand. I see Eucalyptus as a little softer and easier to cut then dried sandy Live Oak but not too much difference. Philbert has posted several suggested angles and recommended settings that concur for most part with my experience. One thing that I think is so often overlooked are the rakers. They must be on the aggressive side other wise the cutter will skim over the wood creating too much heat and to dull much faster. To be perfect the OP must experiment with a few degrees one way or other. It is a little easier to hand file a chain on the spot with some variation to angle and depth. However one could argue how precise the OP could set up or sharpen a chain with a well adjusted grinder in their shop. The weather, saw, brand of chain, and set up vary quite a bit so the perfection is always a moving target. One day the OP might be cutting 18'' logs and the next day 50'' logs which will be quite different. Thanks
I have been thinking non stop on this topic, even considering and ordering (before changing my mind) the fg2 just to see what I might be missing out on. Then I end up just accepting that, for my needs, what I’m doing with a hand file seems to work well and I enjoy the simplicity and freedom a file brings.
As a professional knife sharpener, I have tried my fair share of jigs, grinders and abrasives and always end up where I started, going freehand, for no other reason than I find tools / jigs just have their own complications, learning curves, restrictions etc that I find freehand the lesser of all evils. I’ve got lots more to experiment with, but that’s all in time.
As a professional knife sharpener, I have tried my fair share of jigs, grinders and abrasives and always end up where I started, going freehand, for no other reason than I find tools / jigs just have their own complications, learning curves, restrictions etc that I find freehand the lesser of all evils. I’ve got lots more to experiment with, but that’s all in time.
In many ways, the FG2 will not do anything that a much less expensive, Granberg style jig does. It it more massive, and mounts to a bench, eliminating the need for a guide bar. Some people are satisfied with basic transportation, and some people appreciate the difference a really nice car makes, if they can afford one.
Yes. Every filing guide has advantages and limitations. It is helpful for an engaged user to understand these. For others, they help to 'simplify' a task that they might not fully understand. They develop skill and experience with a certain tool, or method, and that works for them.
Philbert
It used to be we got knowledge from books personal experiences but knew we still had lots to learn and some of the best knowledge was past down from the older wiser been there done that mastered it guy's.
But now day's with the internet everyone is an expert on any matter look at youtube at all the how to sharpen a chainsaw videos my guess 1% of these videos are of any value.
If someone is new to hand filing gaining knowledge off someone like Philbert on the matter is a good starting point at least you won't be steered in the wrong direction when it comes to sharping chain from the get go.
But now day's with the internet everyone is an expert on any matter look at youtube at all the how to sharpen a chainsaw videos my guess 1% of these videos are of any value.
If someone is new to hand filing gaining knowledge off someone like Philbert on the matter is a good starting point at least you won't be steered in the wrong direction when it comes to sharping chain from the get go.
Yes, you just summarised a few of my posts about wanting to test it for myself.
I appreciate and really value guidance and take it on board, use it when I haven’t got any idea or am new to learning a given subject, but over time when I have a grip of concepts and expectations, I tend to obsess and have a desire to test what is said to validate what I understand to be correct, just in case it shows itself not to be or if there is a way to do it better that is more suited to me.
And here is both sides of the chain for side profile - again, no obsessing, just a quick 15 min job :
It’s really comfortable lol
Yes, I stubbed my fingers a number of times against the wood and so have gotten to a point where I keep a bit of clearance from it, but absolutely right longer strokes would be more efficient use of the file for sure. I’m really new to hand filing, I have only done it for a couple of months so I’m still learning the ropes.
Ha! That’s so funny you thought it was on the right way! Yes, chain is spun round
I found the boards useful because the bars are worn and the chain rocks, so I put the board as far up as the rivets and it’s rock solid steady. Plus I then have my angles. I’d like to find an easier solution, I guess that will come with time and experience.
An easier solution is to lose the vise, get the chain on straight, get around behind or even beside the saw, hold the tooth with one hand and file with the other. It doesn't matter if the tooth rocks a bit, your file will naturally follow the tooth if you just let it. Thousands of sawhands working in the bush have done it that way forever. or you can snug the chain on the bar and use both hands on the file.
your file is wandering around with a rock-solid tooth..so what's the point? The tooth and the file can wander together, no issue within reason.
your file is wandering around with a rock-solid tooth..so what's the point? The tooth and the file can wander together, no issue within reason.
I REALLY like your sharpening jig. Simple. Creative. Effective. innovative: significantly different than other approaches I have seen.
Thanks for sharing that!
Philbert
Thanks Philbert! I really appreciate you saying so!
Warm regards, Tom
RE: Set and static vs dynamic saw blades.
Static blades, such as band saws, circular saws, etc. Which are made of a single thickness and then have the teeth set out to the side to create a kerf to clear the rest of the saw cut VERY differently than dynamic cutting devices such as chainsaw chain. There is plenty of set even in a cutter tooth that has been fully reduced to it's minimum length to clear the guide bar. Band saw and circular saw style blades teeth do not adjust themselves via a depth gauge system. Therefore differences in tooth geometry can be significantly detrimental to the cutting characteristics. Saw chain, not so much. Each tooth is designed to adjust and cut on it's own and the flexibility of the chain allows for that. This post assumes that all depth gauges are set based on it's own cutters height and the difference between each cutter and it's associate depth gauge are equal.
A chain with one side reduced to minimum length and the other side left whole will cut very marginally faster than a whole chain left whole because it's removing less wood since one side has less(but still sufficient) set. The minimum amount of set required to eliminate friction with the blade material is the most efficient system when considering solid blades. The less set in the blade reduces the amount of material you have to remove, therefore less work you require to cut through the log. This is why chains nearing the end of life cut faster than new. They're removing less material due to less set. Plus they have more room to hold chip, but I believe that's fairly minor compared to the reduced set.
Efficiency = faster cutting right? So, according to my grasp on physics, a chain with uneven cutters can absolutely be more efficient than one with equal length cutters(everything else being equal). Since they still have sufficient set to clear the bar, and can cut straight, I don't see the lost efficiency. Maybe I'm missing something, if someone has some physical evidence that shows why equal length cutters causes significant efficiencies elsewhere in the system, I'm all ears. But saying 'this person says so' isn't going to do it for me.
I was always taught growing up that you have to keep all the cutters the same. And I did for a long time because that's the 'right way' to do it. Spent hours of my life wasting tooth length on rocked chains. Then did some experimenting and timed cuts. Found significantly different cutter length to not be a problem at all on saw chain. Now I file each tooth till it's sharp and have removed any dings in that cutter. I treat each cutter individually. No issues.
Static blades, such as band saws, circular saws, etc. Which are made of a single thickness and then have the teeth set out to the side to create a kerf to clear the rest of the saw cut VERY differently than dynamic cutting devices such as chainsaw chain. There is plenty of set even in a cutter tooth that has been fully reduced to it's minimum length to clear the guide bar. Band saw and circular saw style blades teeth do not adjust themselves via a depth gauge system. Therefore differences in tooth geometry can be significantly detrimental to the cutting characteristics. Saw chain, not so much. Each tooth is designed to adjust and cut on it's own and the flexibility of the chain allows for that. This post assumes that all depth gauges are set based on it's own cutters height and the difference between each cutter and it's associate depth gauge are equal.
A chain with one side reduced to minimum length and the other side left whole will cut very marginally faster than a whole chain left whole because it's removing less wood since one side has less(but still sufficient) set. The minimum amount of set required to eliminate friction with the blade material is the most efficient system when considering solid blades. The less set in the blade reduces the amount of material you have to remove, therefore less work you require to cut through the log. This is why chains nearing the end of life cut faster than new. They're removing less material due to less set. Plus they have more room to hold chip, but I believe that's fairly minor compared to the reduced set.
Efficiency = faster cutting right? So, according to my grasp on physics, a chain with uneven cutters can absolutely be more efficient than one with equal length cutters(everything else being equal). Since they still have sufficient set to clear the bar, and can cut straight, I don't see the lost efficiency. Maybe I'm missing something, if someone has some physical evidence that shows why equal length cutters causes significant efficiencies elsewhere in the system, I'm all ears. But saying 'this person says so' isn't going to do it for me.
I was always taught growing up that you have to keep all the cutters the same. And I did for a long time because that's the 'right way' to do it. Spent hours of my life wasting tooth length on rocked chains. Then did some experimenting and timed cuts. Found significantly different cutter length to not be a problem at all on saw chain. Now I file each tooth till it's sharp and have removed any dings in that cutter. I treat each cutter individually. No issues.
Difference between ALL the Right cutters set at one point and ALL the Left cutters set at another, compared to every tooth set at random lengths / sets / angles, etc.
Again, if it works for you, and you are satisfied with it, then stick with it.
Philbert
I've compared my old chains to my new out of the box and once hand filed chains. Meaning all the cutters were of fairly different lengths left/right on the old chains. Same result, old chains were faster. I used the example what I figured to be the most extreme test for brevity.
It does work for me, and I am satisfied with it. But I'm always willing to learn. I'm also willing to explain why I think something and provide a physics based explanation as to why I believe it to be true. I haven't seen that proving that equal length cutters are more efficient nor do I see that in my own testing.
Actually I just thought of something. Lets say I put a brand new chain on. First cut, I rock it, and 1/3 of the cutters need to be sharpened significantly more than the others. That chain would cut faster and be more efficient if I sharpened all the teeth back to the shortest one. Not because they're all the same length, but because I have reduced the amount of kerf the chain is cutting overall making it faster/more efficient. I will agree with that. However, the time gained there IMO(and this is where opinion comes in) isn't worth the life of the chain lost. My chains last longer when I don't reduce all teeth to the same length. The very minor efficiencies gained by reducing all tooth length to the smallest isn't worth the efficiency gained by that, but it may be to some people.
So, I'm not saying that it's wrong or bad to reduce all teeth to the shortest. Just that the comment that 'chain with the same length cutters is always more efficient than chain without' is wrong.
None one said all over the place cutter length chain won't cut straight or not cut fast in softer timber.
If a cutter in front has less set and the next in line cutter behind it has more set (same side) the cutter with more set has to do MORE work in removing the smaller kerf left behind by the cutter with less set in front of it.
How that can be classed as efficient is over my head? a hand full of cutters with more set doing more work than the cutters with less set.
Sure as said in soft timber all over the place cutters don't matter but getting into the hardwoods here in Australia where it takes power to pull the cutters through the timber each cutter doing close to the same work free hand filing helps make for a more efficient chain.
And no one said that I'm aware of if you hit something on a few cutters say 3to take all cutters back just to clean a few that hit something that would be a waste of chain. Personally I don't worry about a few rocked cutters I give them the same rubs as the rest they will eventually clean up after a few sharpens and yes you can feel the rocked cutters in the cut its not as smooth but nothing to lose sleep over it comes good after a few sharpens you sharpen after every tank of fuel anyway cutting hardwoods like Ironbark.
But as Philbert says find what works for you.
If a cutter in front has less set and the next in line cutter behind it has more set (same side) the cutter with more set has to do MORE work in removing the smaller kerf left behind by the cutter with less set in front of it.
How that can be classed as efficient is over my head? a hand full of cutters with more set doing more work than the cutters with less set.
Sure as said in soft timber all over the place cutters don't matter but getting into the hardwoods here in Australia where it takes power to pull the cutters through the timber each cutter doing close to the same work free hand filing helps make for a more efficient chain.
And no one said that I'm aware of if you hit something on a few cutters say 3to take all cutters back just to clean a few that hit something that would be a waste of chain. Personally I don't worry about a few rocked cutters I give them the same rubs as the rest they will eventually clean up after a few sharpens and yes you can feel the rocked cutters in the cut its not as smooth but nothing to lose sleep over it comes good after a few sharpens you sharpen after every tank of fuel anyway cutting hardwoods like Ironbark.
But as Philbert says find what works for you.
