rubbish chainsaw operator

seen SIP Freedom and Progress mentioned here so may as well add I've recently got a pair of SIP Innovation II's. Course, we're now out of summer so I can't comment on how breathable they are but they're fairly thin material, and everything else about them so far is good, it's just they cost 200 quid give or take a tenner.

never mind, mis-read your comment. you are on about the bend... the knot, that's a bend, not the bend that's a hitch, and both you and ross are on the same page.

so I was correct in my original interpretation? can we make sure we're on about the same knots here? are you talking about the fisherman's knot, which is a bend? Fisherman's knot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or the fisherman's bend, which is a hitch? Anchor bend - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Treehog, Tree Austria 3.1, TreeFlex, Komet Butterfly and Petzl Sequoia harnesses do allow for replacement bridges, yes. But you have to either buy one of their stitched ones, or get one spliced yourself. That wasn't the question I was asking originally. I was looking for other harnesses in the European market like the TreeMOTION, which incorporate a design similar to ones more widespread in America whereby the bridge can simply be tied on using double overhands. It seems bizarre to me that the TreeMOTION does conform to the directives in question where other harnesses of this design don't. However, since it is the exception and not the rule, I guess I'll just ignore it and stick with the harness designs which are obviously accepted in Europe. ohh I finally get what PineSapKnuckle was trying to say - tie the bridge to itself, not to the shackles. In all honesty, I think I'll end up getting one spliced and save the headache of dealing with knots and extra lengths of rope dangling about.

it's worth noting that when i mentioned the dangers of tying off a rope bridge to the shackles of the treehog, i was only taking into consideration: 1] the double overhand, which is used as a stop knot on the harnesses with the rigging plates, and 2] the double fishermans, which you mentioned. the double fishermans is a bend and only suitable for tying rope to rope. the anchor bend, on the other hand, is not actually a bend, and theoretically could be used to tie off a rope bridge to the shackles. doing so would have the same problems as using splices as far as space is concerned. it would be messy. [sorry for thinking aloud on the forum, writing helps me work through things]

I don't think the space taken up with the splicing is too much of a problem for 2 reasons: 1] I don't see much need for moving the anchor point all the way to either side of the bridge. 2] I'm 6 foot 4, so I can handle a long bridge if needs be. The main problem with splicing IMO is how there's no room for adjustment. Use knots, and you can over-estimate the length you'll need, tie it up, try it out, and untie and retie it shorter and cut the excess off. With splicing, not only are you stuck with the length you get, but the only way to remove your anchor points is to destroy the bridge. The only way to change your anchor points is to start from scratch. Factoring the costs of the harnesses themselves, it could still work out cheaper, but having to dish out more cash for splicing [assuming you're unable to splice 16 strand yourself] would be disheartening. the knots wouldn't bother me if it were rigging plates I were tying them behind, and if the harness were designed like that in the first place [such as the american ones I linked to in the original post]. i'm not sure i'd trust knots tied behind or on the d ring shackles on the treehog and tree austria. just comes across as unreliable, dangerous and probably more likely to fail LOLER inspection than even a non CE marked harness. even if the harness weren't designed for it, I've looked for nice harnesses in the EU that could have something similar to the Liger mod of the Weaver Cougar done to them [the Cougar harness isn't CE marked either]. they just don't seem to exist. For example, the Treehog harness has stitching in places that the Cougar doesn't, and to remove that stitching would damage the structural integrity and load-bearing capacity of the harness, which would amount to insanity.

surely it's within a company's interest to open themselves up to the largest market possible? CE and ANSI standards aren't mutually exclusive. I don't understand why Buckingham don't do this. I'm sure there are plenty more people in Europe who would import them and buy them if they did.

yeah, the Tree Austria is CE approved - being made within the EU it has to be. the method for bridge replacement for it is also used in the Treehog harnesses, which I also looked at as a possible option. I doubt the replacement bridges for either saddle would work for what I want to do - that is, using a large rigging plate as the anchor point on the bridge. I guess the other possibility would be to use a length of rope as the bridge on the Treehog or Tree Austria, get one end spliced, put the rigging plate on it, get the other end spliced and attach that to the harness. Both the lower price for the harness, and CE marking are good arguments for favouring that over importing a SherrillTree, even if there are plenty of stories of non CE marked harnesses passing LOLER inspections. Cheers for making me reconsider it.

Why is it that the TreeMOTION seems to be the only CE certified harness to allow the user to modify and replace the bridge to their preferred length and with their preferred attachments? I've been looking at others, see: http://www.wesspur.com/images/treegear/SAD140-500.gif http://www.sherrilltree.com/core/media/media.nl?id=120086&c=839638&h=673a6d18641a5daa4569 Those are the Buckingham ErgoLite Spartan, and SherrillTree Edge, both of which are based on the Ergovation. I'm pretty sure New Tribe have similar designs too, but AFAIK they're not CE certified either. I'm not interested in the TreeMOTION. Buying one within the UK costs as much as the ErgoLite Spartan plus shipping plus import tax put together does, and the latter looks like a nicer harness. Why is this design not more prevalent within the EU? It looks so incredibly useful. Just take a length of rope of your preferred length, tie a double overhand into one end, thread the other end through one of the rigging plates, whack on whatever attachments you need, thread the end through the other rigging plate and finish it off with another double overhand and you get a bridge that does exactly what YOU want it to, not some generic design made to make the largest number of people think "It's okay I guess, I can make do with it". For example, I'd put an ICS Wales RP320 on. Bring the bridge rope up through one of the end holes on the row of 5, over into the adjacent large centre hole, pass it under and into the other one next to it, and over into the other end hole in the row of 5 so that 1] It doesn't slip around and tip me sideways like your average D ring, whilst allowing me to slide it with my hands if needs be. 2] It gives me a row of 8 holes to rigidly hold as many biners as I'll ever need in place, without them constantly getting muddled up with one another. Is there a single CE approved harness I could realistically do this with... apart from the TreeMOTION?

sorry i take that back, i didn't realise there was a 2 week old thread where people actually discuss other saws.

sorry for re-awakening a dead thread, but i'm curious. it's become obvious that, aside from this one guy i know irl, the choice of one of the above listed stihl top handled chainsaws is just about unanimous. where are the husky guys who put up such a solid argument when it comes to rear handled chainsaws? do you guys also concede that in this case, stihl trumps all?

yep, looks like they've done you over too. My guess is, CS34 was a Level 2 and CS35 a Level 3. They've now combined the 2 under one unit, 0021-02. In other words, if you wanted the Level 3 qual in severing multiple uprooted/windblown trees, you'd have to dish out to do a course that covers the equivalent of a unit you've already done and paid for.

I did my CS32 in February 2011, and I've just got my certificate out and it clearly says "Level 2". However, I've been looking at NPTC's qualification structure to determine which qualification covers severing uprooted or windblown trees [which I have an interest in adding to my ticket], and I noticed they've given it a thorough shuffling since 2011 http://www.nptc.org.uk/assets/documents/9aacc4473c114303a08c17af3ced9076.pdf Now, as 0021-11, the course under exactly the same description [see title] is listed as a Level 3... !? Is the training/assessment any different? I wouldn't mind a certificate that actually said "Level 3" on it. What would I need to do in order to get one? Would it cost much? I'm getting tired of bloody bureaucrats moving the line to continuously extort people. Jeez.

Okay so in case you were wondering Rob, the VH2T-8Q45-A bar you sent out this week [or one of them anyway] was one I had ordered having talked to shavey through messages. Shavey had said he uses husky and oregon bars on his dolmar saws, so I ordered the bar, crossed my fingers and hoped for the best. I've just spent some time using a spare piece of card and some tracing paper [ie grease proof baking paper] to make a template of the sugi's bar mount, cut it out, stuck it on the dolmar's powerhead and went through the chain tensioner's full range of motion, and it lined up properly. I'd like to wait until i get the chains to fit the bar and check the oil flow then, just to be doubly sure, but so far it looks like it's going to work - good news for myself and anyone else with a dolmar with the same bar mount. just checked, the 18" solid sugi is only about 250g heavier than the 15" laminated dolmar bar.

Thanks for your advice. I used the oregon selector guide, but it didn't kick up anything of use. if needs be i'll just buy Dolmar's 18" laminated bars for the time being. I was wondering the same thing about laminated vs solid. I've only ever used laminated, and their owners always seem to keep them for ages despite large amounts of wear. If you're doing a lot of boring or cutting dirty wood, being able to replace the nose is a plus. since i don't, it may not even make much difference but i'd like to see how long one could last anyway. With 15" bar and chain attached, it's weighing in at about 7.5 kilos. plus the weight of your fuel [keeping in mind it holds 0.8 litres] and chain oil, it'll be a bit over 8 kilos full [hopefully i've done my maths right]. Shipping and whatever other fees I paid included, it worked out about 525 quid.

thanks for this advice also. they've grouped the 6100 with, amongst others, the 540 which i'd also found through searching bar serial numbers, aswell as the 5105. I think it's safe to say it uses the same bar mount as those models, which in theory means the Sugi bar I was asking about should work fine. Funnily enough, that guide doesn't list any .058" 3/8" bars for those models, even though the 6100's parts list does, and that's what I ordered it with. Aren't you and other 5105 users also using .058"'s on them? Anyway, it's getting late so I'd better be off. Cheers, rubbish

Cheers for the reply shavey, I ordered it from Germany. I can't stand dealing with customs - the waiting time, the spreading out of payments and so on. 3/8 chain but I got it with a 15" bar, not realising this saw's a bit bigger than expected. They advertise it as both a good felling and snedding saw, but I'm going to have to bulk up a wee bit before I can efficiently sned for a prolonged time with it. My intention was to get a smaller saw - this is the biggest one I've ever held, I'm thinking I could've done with the 5105, but I'm up for sticking with this one. The bars I was asking rob about are 18". At least that way I can switch them out given the situation. Besides, I'm not brand loyal, you'll never catch me kitted out like a salesman. I like shopping around and buying bits and bobs from specialists, and putting it all together, and the solid Sugi bars look just like that. What else? I haven't started the saw yet. I'm a bit scared to get it dirted up before covering all bases. Possibly next week though. Cheers, rubbish

Hello Rob, registered on Arbtalk to ask you a question before realising I could have contacted you via e-mails on your site. since I've registered now, may as well ask here in case its of relevance to others. Bit of background first [sorry in advance for the life story], I've held my CS30+31 for 3 years and CS32 for almost as long, but have always used other peoples' saws. The Stihls I've used put me off the brand, but looking at the current Husky and Jonsered ranges they're advertising a lot of USP's as if they're a good thing, when to me they look unnecessary and gimmicky. Having lurked on here for a bit, I was encouraged by posts by TimberCutterDartmoor, shavey and others and looked at Dolmar saws. Being a clueless idiot, instead of buying an established model I went and got myself a PS-6100, without realising it's only been out for a few months and people are still trying to get their heads round it. The Dolmar part numbers for bars for this saw include: 411 907 650 411 909 650 411 910 650 And by looking up what other chainsaws use those bars, I've determined that the bars Sugihara advertises for them are the ones coded DT4 for solid bars, and DT2 for laminated. It's a laminated bar that came with the saw, and although I'm finding it difficult to check without something tangible to compare against, the mount looks closest to Sugi's DT2. Are the 2 mounting patterns [DT2 and DT4] interchangeable, if I were to get their "Star Tip" replaceable sprocket nose bar? And if so, would I be able to get a couple of DT4T-8Q45-A bars through you whenever you next place an order with them? Cheers