Jump to content

Mick Roseblade

Member
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mick Roseblade

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Personal Information

  • Location:
    South Devon

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hello Guys & Gals, 1st of all Merry Christmas & a healthy/happy new year to you all. Now to business, I am considering purchasing a saw to replace my now ageing Husky 455 and 570 saws. As I am now also ageing, saw weight is becoming an issue for me. I am thinking about getting a stihl ms400. I had a an old 038 back in the day and it was great. However more recent stihl saws have dissapointed me with dodgy caps (new style) and oil leaks from very early stage (just out of warranty). As far as I can see Stihl seem to have made no attempt to modify or improve the caps and seem to be in denial that there is a problem. They have been around for quite some time now so if there is/was a problem they have had plenty opportunity to correct it. So I guess my question is, do you folks still have problems with these or has the issue been quietly rectified? This will probably be my last saw, so I want one that will see me out. Any other specific issues with these saw's ? On paper the specs are good for what I am looking for, but as we all know, whats on paper can be very different to real world use. As for Husqvarna, my now 20 year old 570 has been an excellent work horse, but is now to heavy for me. The 455 rancher which is a much more recent saw has been ok, but feels fragile somehow and has failed far to soon. its not done that much work and light work at that, yet the oil system has failed. when I looked at how the oil pump and hoses are put together I felt the build quality was not up to the job. When the delivery hose is only held on to the pump port by a thin steel sheet that in turn is held in place by only one screw when the clutch cover is off, I feel is asking for trouble. So my dilemma is that both makes now seem to have issues around oiling. It makes me nervous to be paying out almost a grand on something that might give me problems from the start and maybe wont last anywhere near as long as it should. Failure due to wear and tear from use is one thing, failure from poor design and bad build quality is just not acceptable for high priced equipment.
  2. HI guys, Thanks for coming back to this. As it happens the angles you suggested 30, 65 and forget the 10, are exactly the set up I had settled on, and it is certainly an improvement from what I was doing. Simon, I can see exactly what you are saying and I hadn't actually tried that. I can see how that would improve the profile of the tooth, so will give it a go. Regarding over heating the teeth, I have that sussed, but I would point out to anyone having that problem that the procedure you guys suggested is very good and just a note to say that the smaller the chain the more difficult it can be to avoid over heating, IE, even more care required. This is due to the fact that there is less mass of steel on a smaller tooth to dissipate any heat. Thanks
  3. Just out of interest I thought I would get the calipers out and measure my disks and files. Interesting result. Disk 1 3.3mm Disk 2 4.6mm Both disks as supplied by Oregon with the grinder. 3/16 -4.8mm file actual measurement 4.6mm 7/32 -5.5mm file actual measurement 5.4mm Given those results, even if you used the grinding disk horizontal (which you obviously can't), using the recommended disk will always either give you a shallow gullet or a flat grind on the top plate and distorted hook. You could use the 4.6mm disk on the .325 chain but then you run into other issues. So I come back to my point about finding the right angle and depth for the best compromise.
  4. I am using the recommended disks in the grinder handbook. I have 2, one for .325 chains and one for 3/8 chains, I am deliberately setting the depth stop low enough to get the gullet and give me a flat grind to the top plate (just). I know this will distort the hook a bit which is why I was playing with the grind angles to try to find the best compromise. Whilst it may not be technically correct, I just want it to work for me.
  5. Yes that's how I see it, As for burning the chain, I used to use a spray bottle to squirt a bit of water at the disk to help cool it. However I don't bother now, I am just more careful not to take to much at a time.
  6. Yes, I lost the one that came with the grinder, but I have one that came with a Tormek grinder. I haven't had to use it yet though. I check with my profile gauge from time to time and so far so good.
  7. It is true that out of the box they are indeed ground, but they are done individually before the chain is assembled. Once you sharpen them with a file you get the round profile. All I am saying is that I am trying to approximate that profile on my grinder with an already assembled chain and sometimes badly hand filed teeth. I am aware that if you file to high with a round file it causes problems as does filing to low, as you say "too shallow an edge dulls quickly "and weakens the teeth by causing excessive hook. I am just looking for the sweet spot to get a good all round compromise with a grind disk.
  8. Thanks, Its a minor issue most of the time, but I am just trying to be more consistent so I thought a grinder would be a good solution.
  9. When I was 3 years old I was involved in a road accident which left me with permanent nerve damage. I have impaired muscle control and tremors, mild, but enough to cause problems with such things as hand writing and using files and handsaws. So hand filing for me is hit and miss and always will be, I am 62 now, its not going to get any better.
  10. Ok ,so moving on from fishy tales, I started this thread with a question about top plate angles. Now I have checked my chain specs and most of them are 30 degs whilst some quote 28 degs, Since i don't think 2 degs is going to make any significant difference I will stick to 30 degs. When it comes to side angle that's another level of confusion. Just to make clear, I am using an Oregon 620 grinder. The chain vise does not tilt, it only slides back and forth. All my chains are 3/8 or .325 round ground and a mixture of full chis and semi chis. When it comes to the 10 deg tilt angle that some of my chains are supposed to have, I have no choice but grind at 0 deg. So I have my vise centred to 0 deg. If I move it to 10 deg back or forward it makes no visible difference to the working corner. The only difference I can see is that my top plate angle seems to be changed from 30 deg to more like 35. and the gullet has more of a knife edge than if done at 0 deg. I can see why the tilt is used when using a round file, but for a grinding disk, I dont see how it helps. As far as the tilt angle for the disk (side plate angle), I see many different angles quoted 55 degs to 80 degs. I have been grinding at 0-30-60 with the correct size disk for the chain. I tried to put a round file into a tooth yesterday and noticed that the hook was excessive. Ie when the file was resting against the top plate and the gullet it was nowhere near touching the back of the hook. I set my grinder depth stop such that it gets the gullet without touching the tie straps and gives a flat grind to the top plate. I know this will give a misshaped hook so I am not looking for perfection. If I change the side plate angle down to eg, 55 deg, I get an aggressive but short lived cut and the hook is even deeper. If I go up to 70 deg the hook seems a closer approximation to that from round files but a top plate ground at 70 degs is a long way off 55 degs which is recommended on some of my chains. I experimented a bit and found that if I grind at 65 degs it seems to give the best shape to the hook on both 3/8 and .325 chains regardless of make or model and a reasonable compromise of aggression and strength. Since I assume that we are trying to approximate the tooth profile that would be given by a round file (but with the advantage of a flat grind rather than a hollow grind) when grinding with a disk, I dont understand why so many different angles are quoted, especially when filing with a round file if done at the correct height, that angle is almost impossible to guestimate and is set by the size and height of the file anyway. I am not after a hot saw, nor am I a production cutter, I use farm grade saws currently 435, 455 and 570 Huskys, although I have used Stihl saws previously. I am just looking for a good all round saw that cuts smooth and straight. So, am I missing something here?
  11. Could it be the bar is misaligned either because studs are shunted or the actual saw case has been pulled out of shape by the damage thus putting potentially straight studs out of alignment? I cant see how bent spikes would cause a bar to overheat so fast, but a misaligned bar would.
  12. Thanks Guys, It seems the consensus is pretty much to stick to script.
  13. I was just wondering what top plate angles you guys use? Ie 30 deg being a fairly standard angle but do you guys vary either way or choose your angles depending on the wood you are cutting eg hard/soft? I am assuming 30 was chosen as an average to cover general use but I am aware some manufacturers quote 25 or 35. I realise its not critical as long as you keep consistent so I guess my question really is do people bother.
  14. Bearing in mind we have only heard one side of the story, From what has been said it looks to me like the dealer is trying to cover up a botched repair, the fuel issue is a bit of a side issue. A saw repaired at a dealer should start with ease staightaway and yes that should have been demonstrated at the shop. Begs the question why not, Also the aspen fuel is a bit of a red herring as millions of users have run saws on regular 2 stroke mix for years. Were they perhaps just trying to flog you the fuel they happen to sell. I think its definatly time to get legal, they have stolen your property and removed evidence.
  15. Hi folks, Just to settle the argument, I got the decimal point in the wrong place in my original posting. it should have read 0.022" and 0.025" making the difference between the 3 thou or B----r all worth worrying about it seems.

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.