Logster lite mill

[harvey b davison]

Hi, has anyone any experience with the logster lite mill from tcf engineering.

 

Good and bad points please, thinking of getting one.

 

cheers.

[Chris Sheppard]

One of the disadvantages that I could see over an alaskan was that you had to use the same size bar each time - if you wanted to use a smaller bar any time you couldn't.

[agg221]

I have no personal experience of this mill, but use an Alaskan and some observations on points of difference:

 

The vertical posts are round rather than square. This probably makes clamping to them a bit easier (no special blocks required).

The vertical posts are painted - this will probably rub off pretty quickly. Doesn't matter so long as the height marks aren't painted on!

The minimum thickness is slightly greater and the maximum 10" slightly smaller. The minimum probably won't matter - milling much under an inch is unusual, although if you're skimming faces on a beam for example to get to a particular width or to take out a rot streak then it can be useful. The maximum would probably be fine for a 24" mill or smaller. For big stuff I like to split it up the middle first to take the stresses out of it. I find the 13" capacity on the Alaskan restrictive (don't forget you need to add in a guide rail the first time which takes 2-3" off) so this would be too small for me. It does say they can build different sizes though, so asking them to make the uprights take an 18" cut on a 36" width mill would be a useful size.

It looks relatively heavy. The fact that it's painted suggests it may be steel rather than aluminium, which would make it heavier still. The Alaskan on a saw is heavy enough to lug into the woods. I wouldn't fancy it with anything heavier so it depends on how you are getting log to saw.

 

Otherwise, looks a bit cruder but perfectly functional.

 

Just my observations.

 

Alec

[Big J]

I had an early model before an Alaskan:

 

Pros:

 

It's heavy. You want heavy as you won't have to push the mill into the wood to keep it flat.

It has longer approach and departure rails, and has four, instead of two. The upshot of this is that you can keep a flatter cut coming onto and off the log.

It's cheap.

 

Cons:

 

No measurement marking system - you have to measure each adjustment manually, which is a pain.

Bar clamping unreliable - had bar come loose in milling with predictably distastrous results for my chain

Only one size of bar per mill - no adjustment.

 

IMO you would be better getting an Alaskan.

[harvey b davison]

Cheers everyone

 

I have wanted to have a go at milling for ages, so i'm going to get myself a small one, just to see how i go with it.

[slack ma girdle]

I have had a logster lite for two Years. Yes it has it bad points, but you learn to live with them, and it is £150 cheaper than an Alaskan.

At the end of the day they both mill timber.

[harvey b davison]

I have had a logster lite for two Years. Yes it has it bad points, but you learn to live with them, and it is £150 cheaper than an Alaskan.

At the end of the day they both mill timber.

 

Hi, thanks for the reply.

 

Just how bad do you find the bad points.

 

Like i said earlier, this will be my first foray into milling, so i want to get it right.

[slack ma girdle]

Hi, thanks for the reply.

 

Just how bad do you find the bad points.

 

Like i said earlier, this will be my first foray into milling, so i want to get it right.

 

There is not any one thing that is particularly bad, but:

 

Adjusting the depth of cut is abit fiddly. I use a steel rule across the top and measure up to it, allowing 1 3/8" for the thickness of the tube.

If you over tighten the bar clamps you can bend them, TCF sent me some new ones FOC to replace the bent ones. Since then i have welded in some wider spacers which solved the problem. I sent photos of what i had done, and i think TCF have changed the design.

But as i said earlier it will mill you timber.