Cutting in South Scotland

[Dan Maynard]

39 minutes ago, Mark Bolam said:

5m/minute though.

I’m faster than that with my Tirfor!

Ha ha not 5 minutes a metre, that's 5 metres a minute!

 

Looks a lot easier to carry around too .

[Mark Bolam]

Ha, why do you think my right forearm is so muscular?

[AHPP]

1 hour ago, Mike Hill said:

This is the one I was meaning.

 

Wee.no

WWW.WEE.NO

---

Wee Gruppen

only comes with 4.5 meters of wire but easy to connect it to some more. Be alright on the right jobs.

 

 

There are similar ones (including a Warn) powered by battery drills. Or the sailing winch based ones with a drill.
There’s sort of a gap in the market for a winch that runs off an impact wrench. Foresters already have them for rattle wedges. 

[Donnie]

7 hours ago, Mike Hill said:

That's not what you want to do. You load up the back even more doing that ,higher chance it drifts off the stump during the fall too.

I've put bigger gobs into trees like that and had them go sideways on the weighted side too early. Or maybe that was just me. 
 

An older cutter taught me a few months ago, start the gob high and steep that way you can see your hinge clearly. Hard to describe when writing it on here...

 

 

[Mike Hill]

8 minutes ago, JDon said:

I've put bigger gobs into trees like that and had them go sideways on the weighted side too early. Or maybe that was just me. 
 

An older cutter taught me a few months ago, start the gob high and steep that way you can see your hinge clearly. Hard to describe when writing it on here...

 

 

They have a higher chance of going sideways like you say,bigger gobs are for snags to shift the weight forward when there isnt much of a top to help tip it over.

[slack ma girdle]

17 hours ago, Mike Hill said:

That's not what you want to do. You load up the back even more doing that ,higher chance it drifts off the stump during the fall too.

 

14 hours ago, josharb87 said:

If wedging or jacking that’d mean more effort needed to smack the wedge in/Jack pressure as you’re effectively shortening the leaver effect……but you wouldn’t need as much height in the back cut to tip it over 

The way it was explained to me was to do with the balance point of the tree,  you are not trying to move the whole tree, but half. Plus you have the weight of the tree in front of the hinge to help.

It made sence at the time

[Mike Hill]

1 hour ago, slack ma girdle said:

 

The way it was explained to me was to do with the balance point of the tree,  you are not trying to move the whole tree, but half. Plus you have the weight of the tree in front of the hinge to help.

It made sence at the time

Those trees in the picture have most of their weight at the back due to the long limbs and lean.

 

The more you cut out of the front (ie deep facecut) the more weight you are transfering to the back and the harder they will be to jack over.

 

If the Tree is near vertical,the more you cut out of the front,the more you transfer the weight forward making it easier to fall over.

[slack ma girdle]

22 hours ago, Mike Hill said:

Those trees in the picture have most of their weight at the back due to the long limbs and lean.

 

The more you cut out of the front (ie deep facecut) the more weight you are transfering to the back and the harder they will be to jack over.

 

If the Tree is near vertical,the more you cut out of the front,the more you transfer the weight forward making it easier to fall over.

Good explanation Mike.

[Donnie]

[Donnie]

Some firewood from last week. About a days worth maybe a bit less. 585 is the perfect saw for it.