agg221

Agreed. Whereabouts in the country is it? Alec

Fair price for which aspect - felling and extraction, or sale? There are several dispassionate millers on here (ie they are too far away and will not buy it) who will offer an opinion on what they would pay for it but they would need pictures and would be putting caveats on their opinion regarding quality. Selling standing timber means the buyer takes the risk, so will offer lower. Selling roadside means you have taken the risk on quality (the butts can now be inspected properly) so if they are good you can expect an overall higher price, but any bad ones you may not sell at all. That said, if I was in the market, I would reckon on woodland-grown timber of that size being pretty clean if there are no obvious external defects. That's a good length/diameter which could be put to a range of uses including construction and is also a nice diameter to mill, so I would expect to get a fair amount of interest. Alec

Are there any others growing in the area? Do they do OK? The usual problems in the UK with peaches/almonds etc are late frosts taking out the blossom and damp weather causing peach leaf curl. If you are not prone to either of these problems then you are more likely to have success. Most stone fruits start to crop at around 3-4yrs old and become productive from around 7yrs. You have options as to which rootstock they are grafted on which controls the size. I have no idea exactly what will be available to you locally but in the UK you would use Pixy for a really dwarf tree (6-8ft), St Julien for a modest tree (12-15ft) and Brompton for a big tree (20ft). Almonds aren't that big anyway so reckon on the smaller end of the above. In the UK, Keepers Nursery has a few (not that it helps, but at least it gives some varieties and descriptions, note some are self-fertile): Keepers Nursery UK | Fruit trees for sale | Buy Online | Mail order I would go looking for french nurseries (there are several french varieties of prunus dulcis) and see what shows up. Alec

I might already be in contact with the owner (sorry Clive:001_smile:) Alec

That particular point is a common weakness. If you want to do a useable job it can be rivetted (one of mine was repaired this way when I got it. If you want a good job done it can be rebuilt in weld and dressed off neatly. Alec

At 70cc I might be inclined to stick a 25" bar on it. I would still go for the 24" Alaskan rather than the small log mill as you want to make planks and the outer nose support helps with this. I would also be happy to use poplar for the purposes you describe, but only if you are prepared to treat it. Poplar is surprisingly strong, very durable if kept dry (there in an early cruck frame in poplar which has been re-erected at Avoncroft) and makes very good cladding if you detail it correctly and are prepared to treat it regularly. It responds very well to being treated as it is naturally much more absorbent in cell structure. It is not the low-maintenance option that larch would be, but is fine if you are prepared to work within its characteristics. Alec

I buy chainsaws on ebay. I have bought quite a few and have been happy with all of them. I buy old saws which are usually stated as spares or repair, although I have bought some which have been advertised as runners. All of them have been as per description, if anything slightly better. I communicate with the seller before bidding and usually get a polite, helpful reply. These days, ebay is so stacked in favour of the buyer that there is really very little risk if you exercise basic commonsense. I would not buy the saw in the link because a) the reasons above, b) if I wanted a new saw I would go to a dealer and c) it is highly unlikely from the tone of the advert that the seller is friendly and helpful! Alec

Yes you can mill it with your saw. It will not be quick, but it will be quicker than hand hewing and will give you perfectly useable planking. It will be nothing like Big J's commercial activity but will make enough boards in a day to be reasonably satisfying. 20-26" is reasonably large but poplar is fairly soft and chips out easily so if you take your time it will be OK. I'm not familiar with a 565 - is this model number correct? If what you have is a 60ish cc saw then I would go for a 20" bar, Granberg chain as it compensates a bit for lack of power (you will also need a precision grinder), mini-mill and 24" Alaskan, which will give you about a 14" cut. You will need to take the dogs off the saw. Milling will be a bit fiddly but if you skim the top off the log as deep as you can go, then use the mini-mill to split it in half vertically, then mill each half by standing it up on edge, you will get through it, making boards about 6"-13" width, which is enough for most things. Alec

What sort of diameter is your timber? This will determine what the best option will be. Alec

The 395xp will make a decent milling saw. Alaskan mills are available from several sources, all of which so far as I'm aware are currently the same price (although if you order from chainsawbars as an Arbtalk member you will get a free gift thrown in). Because of the way the mill bolts to the bar you lose about 8" of the bar length (6" if you take the dogs off the saw). This means that a 36" bar will allow you a 28"-30" cut. There is a longer bar available for the 395xp - it's a 42" bar which works for milling but don't expect it to be very quick if you are milling wide enough boards to need it. Chainsawbars still have a few left, but are not re-stocking these: Products for the category: Special Offers There is nothing wrong with Oregon bars for milling - they work fine. Have you tried FR Jones for the saw? They might be able to sell you a bare powerhead (as may several other of the dealers who advertise on here). The dealer who told you that you will need to change the chain pitch is wrong. Don't forget that you will need ripping chain rather than crosscut chain, and unless you are extremely proficient at chain sharpening I would strongly recommend the Granberg precision grinder as you need to keep the teeth not only sharp but also equal in angle and even in length, particularly if you are running at the full width capacity of the saw. Hope this helps! Alec

It doesn't. The measured volume of the log is 34 Hoppus feet. This should convert to 34 cubic feet when milled. Hoppus feet are specifically designed to be a good approximation to cubic foot yield. Alec

Your location certainly won't make it easier, but there are a few people on here who may have the necessary kit - whereabouts in France are you? What saw does your husband have? A small log mill might be viable (depends on the dimensions of the log, which are a bit hard to gauge from the picture). There is another way of doing it, with a side axe, which needs a lot less kit but takes rather longer and requires considerable skill. Would come out with the appropriate surface finish though. Alec

Drop Jonathan (Big J) a pm - he has a good courier for this. Alec

Someone with an Alaskan mill could probably face that up for you for a beam very easily - whereabouts are you? Alec

I think you're bothering because sometimes it's more about whether something -can- be done, rather than whether doing it makes any sense:001_smile: I agree a higher alloy tool steel would be the way to go. O1 is carbon/tungsten/chromium/manganese steel. I think I would go for something with molybdenum and vanadium additions for toughness. Quite expensive per billet though.... Alec

They weren't actually cast - the blades were forged from cast steel. Steel was originally made by diffusing carbon into iron (the purer the better, hence Swedish iron was particularly popular due to the purity of the ore). Crucible steel was invented in the late 1700s which made it much cheaper but still too expensive to be used for whole tools - this is the era when most tools were forged in iron with a steel insert fire welded in to form the cutting edge. The open hearth and Bessemer processes of the late 19th century made steel cheap enough to use for whole tools. This was when 'cast steel' starts appearing on them, to indicate that they were made in the new modern material. The billet was still forged to shape though. In terms of strength - yes a machined head would hold up, but it won't be as good. There are several things which happen when you forge - the grains are usually decreased in size and they end up aligned with the direction in which the steel is drawn. Another effect though is that the 'impurities', along with lattice defects in the crystal structure, tend to get drawn to the grain boundaries. The removal of lattice defects gives improved resistance to failure under impact, so more important for axes than for knives. The 'impurities' are often precipitates of deliberate additions which form intermetallic compounds which are harder. This means you have the very hard component of the structure, backed by the softer, stronger grains to provide toughness. The net effect is a steel which is easier to sharpen but holds its edge better - coincidentally exactly the same effect as was being aimed for in the original fire welded tools with a thin layer of steel welded to softer iron (which is how the Japanese still do it). I have even managed to avoid the words martensite, pearlite and bainite:001_smile: Returning to the original thread, I like my Gransfors axes. Alec

They weren't actually cast - the blades were forged from cast steel. Steel was originally made by diffusing carbon into iron (the purer the better, hence Swedish iron was particularly popular due to the purity of the ore). Crucible steel was invented in the late 1700s which made it much cheaper but still too expensive to be used for whole tools - this is the era when most tools were forged in iron with a steel insert fire welded in to form the cutting edge. The open hearth and Bessemer processes of the late 19th century made steel cheap enough to use for whole tools. This was when 'cast steel' starts appearing on them, to indicate that they were made in the new modern material. The billet was still forged to shape though. In terms of strength - yes a machined head would hold up, but it won't be as good. There are several things which happen when you forge - the grains are usually decreased in size and they end up aligned with the direction in which the steel is drawn. Another effect though is that the 'impurities', along with lattice defects in the crystal structure, tend to get drawn to the grain boundaries. The removal of lattice defects gives improved resistance to failure under impact, so more important for axes than for knives. The 'impurities' are often precipitates of deliberate additions which form intermetallic compounds which are harder. This means you have the very hard component of the structure, backed by the softer, stronger grains. The net effect is a steel which is easier to sharpen but holds its edge better - coincidentally exactly the same effect as was being aimed for in the original fire welded tools with a thin layer of steel welded to softer iron (which is how the Japanese still do it). I have even managed to avoid the words martensite, pearlite and bainite:001_smile: Returning to the original thread, I like my Gransfors axes. Alec

Funnily enough, no. The process of forging causes grain refinement and alignment. You just wouldn't get the same microstructure by machining from a billet. In addition to the technical considerations, it isn't that cost-effective. Consider the shape of rectangular section billet you would need to start with and think about how much weight that is. The scrap is of negligible value so you are wasting that. You would also get through a lot of tool wear to machine it out. You would also have all the heat-treatment costs to get the hardening and tempering, which pretty much offsets the energy costs in forging. In the end it's cheaper just to forge it. There is a smith I know who I spent a week with who is brilliant at forging tools. He particularly specialises in hammers. I first ran across him when I needed a pair of shearing hammers (used for a particular job in wooden boatbuilding). He made them to a drawing, forging by eye and measuring to dimension and supplied them (complete with handles) at £25 each. I think you would struggle to match this by machining them. Alec

A question: I usually mill big, long board type stuff but every now and again I have smaller, shorter things, of a more 'craft' nature which might make good turning blanks. I am happy to mill it, but is there demand, and if so what sizes are interesting? What form should it be taken to (i.e. should I leave it as a plank or cut circles out?) Finally, the inevitable price question. I price timber per cu.ft, depending on whether it's green, dried or planed to dimension. What is the interesting form for turning and is it priced per cu.ft or some other approach? Alternatively I have no shortage of firewood. Cheers Alec

Thanks John - on your points, yes, most timber discussed on here is over the 12" mark. 12" pretty much corresponds to the smaller end of commercial softwood - most hardwoods at 12" would be all sapwood and really not worth the effort. Thankyou for the information on the failure. That particular issue wouldn't occur with the Ripsaw - there just isn't the torque. It might swing a light board but it would still be trapped in the frame. Regarding yesterday's nightmare - I had the mill out again today, sharpened up the band and milled some cherry and poplar. No problems at all, so it must be down to yesterday's particular tree. Worst thing to mill I have ever encountered! Alec

Hi Jonathan, No, it doesn't produce a wobbly cut with a sharp band. It does climb and dive when the band goes off though but you can feel when you should stop. I have also been trying out a new type of band on it, which is much more resilient. It's a cobalt steel and it doesn't cut as fast but it does hold its edge really well, and even copes with the odd nail. It is also temperamental - today it was in a bad mood. I will need to work out tomorrow whether it's the mill or the timber - I suspect the latter as even the Alaskan was binding up in the cut. It was some horrible oak which just kept grabbing everything unless you banged in fresh wedges every 18" or so. Tedious. The Ripsaw is not a competitor for the Silverclaw. The Silverclaw would seem to be an option for people with log handling equipment, space to set up a fixed operation (or some way of addressing the security issue if leaving it on sites when moving it between them), milling fairly large quantities in a semi-production environment. I would imagine it's a fairly good bet if you have a small softwood woodland and somewhere non-residential with suitable industrial planning permission, such as a firewood processing yard for example. The Ripsaw is fully portable (one handed if you must) and can fit through any gap you can sidle through sideways. It has a very good rail system, which I use with the Alaskan too. It is basically a good partner to an Alaskan as it is much quicker with a thinner kerf (when it isn't sulking). General procedure is to quarter with the Alaskan and then mill, although on smaller logs, up to about 20", I usually just go straight in with the Ripsaw. With regard to the specific questions - getting out of the round is easy, on-site where it lies, ie no extraction needed. It runs down a rail. It won't crosscut or sharpen fenceposts - it's designed for milling, but it will make feather-edge cladding quite well - I made enough to cover my 2-storey extension with it. The main reason it hasn't been CE marked is because nobody has tried. The seller is in the deep south of the US (think Gone With The Wind plantation owner) and really can't be bothered to supply outside the US. He also doesn't do email. It took me over 3months to talk him in to sending me some rails, which basically involved my wife charming him over the phone by flirting in her terribly English accent! It may or may not comply but nothing stands out as an issue. Some of John the Saw's comments are interesting - I would like further details, for example of when a machine of this nature has snagged and got out of control in his experience? I am interested because I can't see how it could do it, so it would be good to be aware of the situation to look out for - my experience to date has been that if the blade pinches it just stops (or jumps the bandwheels and stops). If you let go, like any chainsaw, it stops on the clutch. Bands do snap, usually at the weld - they are fully contained by the guards. Openspaceman - yes you are correct on the 'declaration of conformity'. In my professional capacity we sometimes need to use unique equipment which is not manufactured in Europe - often this is bespoke. We do not have a problem and can either go this route or get it CE marked if required (it's easier for most people to understand if you have the CE marking rather than the declaration). Alec

Not sure where your nearest one is but Ridgeon's do it. They stock Bird Brand which is R.K&J Jones of Diss. Alec

Yep, they're definitely rustic Alec

I use an old plant trailer and an engine hoist. The hoist it the type which comes to bits quickly and doesn't have proper wheels, only the little ones for rolling around in a garage. If you use a reasonable length strop you can get a good swing and move the log around fairly easily, making sure you rest it on blocks rather than the hoist legs. I have moved green oak about 15" dia x 10' long without any difficulty. Alec

There are two different starter units, depending on age. I'm not aware of Stihl selling the bits separately, but you can buy a pattern version of either on ebay.de and then rob it for the bits you need. The problem with switching from old to new is that the starter cup is mounted in the flywheel differently. Unfortunately the inserts are not interchangeable. This means that to change from old to new you need a new recoil starter, a new cup and a new flywheel, which mounts up! The old starter cup is nla, but the old insert can sometimes be had on ebay.com. Alec