Advanced chain sharpening.

[TTownsend]

What’s people’s experience and views on those 2-1 chainsaw file from stihl ? Heard good things

[carlos]

28 minutes ago, TTownsend said:

What’s people’s experience and views on those 2-1 chainsaw file from stihl ? Heard good things

the one that does the rakers at the same time? a friend uses one and he seems to get a nice edge and a smooth cut,

[Woodworks]

48 minutes ago, TTownsend said:

What’s people’s experience and views on those 2-1 chainsaw file from stihl ? Heard good things

I have one.  I tried one for my processor chains but it makes them try to take too big a bite. Seems OK on the saws though. Keep meaning to measure how far it takes the rakers down but gut feeling is it's  bit too far,

[Woodworks]

On 10/10/2018 at 20:02, Woodworks said:

I have one.  I tried one for my processor chains but it makes them try to take too big a bite. Seems OK on the saws though. Keep meaning to measure how far it takes the rakers down but gut feeling is it's  bit too far,

Done a test and it doesn't take them down too far at least not on a chain that needed the rakers taking down. A careful measure after 3 strokes on a 0.325 chain left the rakers 0.5mm below the teeth. As a guide I prefer it to the regular plate type guide as you can watch the file doing it's work and see the top plate angle you are leaving. Also the double support it gets with the two guide rails makes hook angles very consistent.

Edited October 11, 2018 by Woodworks

[neiln]

got the one for my ms180 picco chain (err with 4.0mm files) and the one for standard 3/8 rs chain (errr 5.2mm iirc)  easy to use and seem to get the chain cutting great but now I've got a chain for the 180 well back its looking very very odd!  the chain still cuts well but it seems to blunt easily, teeth have zero hook now....it is as if the file is too large...which actually it is now as stihl recommend swapping down a size as the cutters wear back.  I also realised on that picco (or is it picco micro..which ever) the rakers were not being touched although they are on the bigger chain. I then thought, perhaps the flat file is in backwards (the round files can only fit the right way around,not so with the flat)...my thought was if backwards it wouldn't cut the rakers and after a while wold hold the round file up too high and cause the lack of hook...i checked, turned it around, filed the chain again...nope that's not it.  it seems the 2in1 for the small chain is just weird as the chain gets well back...chain still cuts though

 

[Woodworks]

10 hours ago, neiln said:

got the one for my ms180 picco chain (err with 4.0mm files) and the one for standard 3/8 rs chain (errr 5.2mm iirc)  easy to use and seem to get the chain cutting great but now I've got a chain for the 180 well back its looking very very odd!  the chain still cuts well but it seems to blunt easily, teeth have zero hook now....it is as if the file is too large...which actually it is now as stihl recommend swapping down a size as the cutters wear back.  I also realised on that picco (or is it picco micro..which ever) the rakers were not being touched although they are on the bigger chain. I then thought, perhaps the flat file is in backwards (the round files can only fit the right way around,not so with the flat)...my thought was if backwards it wouldn't cut the rakers and after a while wold hold the round file up too high and cause the lack of hook...i checked, turned it around, filed the chain again...nope that's not it.  it seems the 2in1 for the small chain is just weird as the chain gets well back...chain still cuts though

 

That looks very wrong! You sure you have the right guide and files in it for that chain? If so send it back. My one for the 0.325 does a pretty good job IMO. Defiantly no problems with the hook angle

[Joe Newton]

12 hours ago, neiln said:

got the one for my ms180 picco chain (err with 4.0mm files) and the one for standard 3/8 rs chain (errr 5.2mm iirc)  easy to use and seem to get the chain cutting great but now I've got a chain for the 180 well back its looking very very odd!  the chain still cuts well but it seems to blunt easily, teeth have zero hook now....it is as if the file is too large...which actually it is now as stihl recommend swapping down a size as the cutters wear back.  I also realised on that picco (or is it picco micro..which ever) the rakers were not being touched although they are on the bigger chain. I then thought, perhaps the flat file is in backwards (the round files can only fit the right way around,not so with the flat)...my thought was if backwards it wouldn't cut the rakers and after a while wold hold the round file up too high and cause the lack of hook...i checked, turned it around, filed the chain again...nope that's not it.  it seems the 2in1 for the small chain is just weird as the chain gets well back...chain still cuts though

 

You're not putting anywhere near enough downward pressure on that chain. Those file guides are designed so you literally can't file too far down, so make sure your filling as deep into to file as you can. This is why the rakers aren't being touched too. 

Try a good few passed with no backward pressure just downward to restore the profile and then sharpen downward and backwards into the tooth. 

[wyk]

How advanced your chain filing goes really depends on what you want to accomplish. Longevity and speed aren't often the same. The less chain you have on your saw, the faster it will fly. The thinner your cutters are, the faster it flies, and the better it clears chips. Same with your tie straps and top plates and gullets. You can always search other forums where they are a bit more aggressive with chain sharpening if you just want speed. But if you want reliability as well, then you would likely do as some here have suggested as far as avoiding the strap and using a smaller file.

 

I am very aggressive with my chain when I start with it. I use a save edge file that removes a lot of metal, and I will file down the depth gauge as much as I think I can get away with. I use the same diameter the life of the chain as filing down in to the gullet makes the chain faster and I have only lost a few that way. I also grind off a bit of the back end of the top plate. It is very quick and easy and makes a big difference in speed and chip clearance.

 

Here's a PDF from Madsens' that shows the basics in race chains. I am not putting it up here so you guys learn how to make race chains, but it is here so you know what it is about factory chains that can be improved for speed, why and how.

 

http://www.madsens1.com/PDF/RacingTechfacts_93099.pdf

 

Though this saw is ported, the main reason you are seeing huge chips fly is I have modified this chain for cutting softwoods. If I left the chain stock, it would start to clog up and slow the saw down to the point nearly there was no need to port it so aggressively in the first place for large wood:

 

 

 

 

[neiln]

6 hours ago, Joe Newton said:

You're not putting anywhere near enough downward pressure on that chain. Those file guides are designed so you literally can't file too far down, so make sure your filling as deep into to file as you can. This is why the rakers aren't being touched too. 

Try a good few passed with no backward pressure just downward to restore the profile and then sharpen downward and backwards into the tooth. 

Don't think that's it, the guide rails are firmly on the top of the cutter being filled and cutter in front at all times, more downward pressure won't do diddly.

[neiln]

8 hours ago, Woodworks said:

That looks very wrong! You sure you have the right guide and files in it for that chain? If so send it back. My one for the 0.325 does a pretty good job IMO. Defiantly no problems with the hook angle

I know!  But as the photos show, the guide is marked as 3/8"P which is the chain (3/8" picco) the file size is marked on too, 4mm, and as you can see I checked with the digital caliper that is the file size fitted.

 

I agree it looks wrong though.  Looked ok for ages but got progressively more weird as the cutters got short.  Still cuts though, well in fact.

 

I have a second 2in1 for standard 3/8" chain, with 5.5mm files... Which seems to take more from the rakers and leaves a good cutter shape.... Although I've not done so much filing on those chains, they may get weird as they get short too perhaps.