Never again

[kenmbz]

Moved the splitter last night so it can go vertical.
Now need to move some tree parts around so I can get to the bigger rounds and bring them to the splitter.

 

[Fields_mj]

I could have those noodled in 1/4s with my 500i or 372xp in 1 or 2 minutes each. Thats a heck of a lot faster and easier than pounding wedges.

Yeah, for big rounds you really need a big saw. 75-78cc is marginal. I use an 066 with a 28" bar and 404 chain to noodle. Way easier than driving wedges.

 

[arrow]

Yeah, for big rounds you really need a big saw. 75-78cc is marginal. I use an 066 with a 28" bar and 404 chain to noodle. Way easier than driving wedges.

I was gonna get one of those cheap Chinese knock offs of the Husky 288. Then I decided against it as the efficacy of these things seem to be hit or miss.
If I fry my 257 cutting up the rest of this stem, I’ll just buy a Husky, Stihl or Echo 60 cc.
Double the price I know but at least I’ll have a saw I can depend on.

 

[sixdogs]

As a boy, I lived a while on "Elm Street".
Dutch Elm came through, and all those trees had to come out. Some of it went to fireplaces, BUT NOT MUCH!
We strapping young boys learned quickly. ;-)

But it does burn forever and really throw the heat.

 

[arrow]

So I timed the difference between noodling and splitting. Now keep in mind. This is with a saw That was just under 60 cc and a 20 inch bar.
When I noodled the 3 foot hunk, it took four minutes or two minutes per cut. I’m sure with a bigger chainsaw, It may have taken half that but what I didn’t like about noodling where the noodles were jamming up into the sprocket area of the saw, which would heat things up.
I then took to splitting the hunks.
That took three minutes to quarter the rounds.
Because of my equipment, my preferred method was the splitting. Saved gas on the chainsaw and the wear and tear on it.
What was nice Was that the quarters split with one whack of the maul most of the time and that saved a ton of time.

 

[CliffordK]

It might be fun to try hitting some of those larger rounds with a splitting mall. What I have found is that rather than trying to split across the center, start peeling them like an onion.

I.E. Go for a 4" slab or so off the side. I've done it with oak... that if one isn't careful, the maul will just bounce back.

 

[Quaffer]

Yes it produces a lot of wood but it’s way too much work so, I won’t be doing that again.

In addition to being a PIA I know someone who developed a hernia when on the ground pushing/pulling a huge round. Never again!

 

[arrow]

It might be fun to try hitting some of those larger rounds with a splitting mall. What I have found is that rather than trying to split across the center, start peeling them like an onion.

I.E. Go for a 4" slab or so off the side. I've done it with oak... that if one isn't careful, the maul will just bounce back.

They were really easy to split as long as the whack was on the edge.
I just needed them small enough to carry to the splitter and let that tool make the smaller wood.

 

[dodge man]

When noodling it helps to pull the saw out and let it clean itself out once in a while. Once in a while I’d have to shut the saw down and clean out noodles. I haven’t noodled since I got a splitter that went vertical.

 

[BackRoad]

Us boys who have lived in Oklahoma don't think "noodling" means the same as y'all...!!!

 

[WinterDeere]

So I timed the difference between noodling and splitting. Now keep in mind. This is with a saw That was just under 60 cc and a 20 inch bar.
When I noodled the 3 foot hunk, it took four minutes or two minutes per cut. I’m sure with a bigger chainsaw, It may have taken half that but what I didn’t like about noodling where the noodles were jamming up into the sprocket area of the saw, which would heat things up.
I then took to splitting the hunks.
That took three minutes to quarter the rounds.
Because of my equipment, my preferred method was the splitting. Saved gas on the chainsaw and the wear and tear on it.
What was nice Was that the quarters split with one whack of the maul most of the time and that saved a ton of time.

I believe your result, if based on time alone, and given the equipment used in the comparison. But if figuring in fatigue and some different equipment, I think you could still make an argument for noodling.

I burn about 10 cords per year, and there was a period of about 8 years where it seemed nothing I was bringing home was under 3' in diameter, so I was either noodling or man-handling these huge rounds over and over, all weekend every weekend, for at least a few years.

I never specifically timed it, but due to the wear and tear on me, and the overall fatigue over the course of a day or weekend, I found noodling to be my preferred solution. But having said that, I wouldn't even consider noodling with anything as small as 50cc. The issue isn't so much the power required, but the size of the chain guard and how well it can quickly clear those long-strand noodles without jamming up.

I have an 036 Pro and an AV 064, the predecessors to today's MS 362 and MS 662 saws, and even the 63cc 036 is pretty lame when trying to noodle. Again, it has plenty of power for the job, but the narrower chain guard is forever jamming up with noodles when I push it too fast. By comparison, the 85cc 064 just blasts through the rounds, like a light sabre thru butter, throwing a continuous rooster trail of noodles out behind me.

 

[arrow]

I believe your result, if based on time alone, and given the equipment used in the comparison. But if figuring in fatigue and some different equipment, I think you could still make an argument for noodling.

I burn about 10 cords per year, and there was a period of about 8 years where it seemed nothing I was bringing home was under 3' in diameter, so I was either noodling or man-handling these huge rounds over and over, all weekend every weekend, for at least a few years.

I never specifically timed it, but due to the wear and tear on me, and the overall fatigue over the course of a day or weekend, I found noodling to be my preferred solution. But having said that, I wouldn't even consider noodling with anything as small as 50cc. The issue isn't so much the power required, but the size of the chain guard and how well it can quickly clear those long-strand noodles without jamming up.

I have an 036 Pro and an AV 064, the predecessors to today's MS 362 and MS 662 saws, and even the 63cc 036 is pretty lame when trying to noodle. Again, it has plenty of power for the job, but the narrower chain guard is forever jamming up with noodles when I push it too fast. By comparison, the 85cc 064 just blasts through the rounds, like a light sabre thru butter, throwing a continuous rooster trail of noodles out behind me.

Yeah, I don’t disagree with that assessment. I don’t have what I used to have as far as equipment having once 20 chainsaws of all different types and sizes and now down to just three, i simply have to make do the best I could with what I had.
I agree that if it was a constant barrage of big pieces, then for the continuation of production, I would noodle with a big saw.
So in my circumstance, I will avoid anything over 18 inches diameter in my future if I can help it.
The handling of this stem from start to finish including stacking took about 6-7 hrs total.
It produced a bit over a cord which I think ridiculous for the time spent as half that time was about wrestling with the beastly chunks.
Great exercise if leaning toward that.
From a loggers stand point, I seldom ventured into the wood with more than a 20” bar. Seldom if ever did we limb as we were not interested in the crown.
What I think as the perfect homeowners firewood saw is a 60-65 cc engine with a 16” and 24” bar.
When cutting rounds with a bar much shorter than the width of the stem, place the saw directly on top of the log and pivot the saw downward with the cut having the dogs bite into the pivot until the saw is near vertical then drag the cut toward you on your side of the log until you’re at the bottom.
What this provides is a slot acting as a guide for the saw on the far side for you to match the cut you just made on the near side.

 

[WinterDeere]

What I think as the perfect homeowners firewood saw is a 60-65 cc engine with a 16” and 24” bar.

Agreed. I bought the 63cc Stihl 036 Pro with a 20" bar years ago, after reading more than once on various forums, that this was the best configuration any firewood cutter could ever want. I found the 20" bar was a bit much for it, when you have it buried past the nose in oak, but I was able to resolve that by installing some big cutting dogs that reduced exposed bar length to about 19". That seems to be about what that displacement can handle, again when burrying the thing into 30" oak rounds.

Then I started bringing home all this enormous stuff (ever cut a Ø60-inch white oak? I have! ), and realized 63cc was just too small, and started buying bigger saws. After a few swaps (084, 056 Mag, etc.), I eventually settled on the light and fast 85cc 064 AV as the ideal compliment to the 63cc 036 Pro. It's a winning combo, that I'd probably repeat again if buying today, with an MS 362 + MS 662 (since there's no MS 642).

If not dealing with huge stuff, I'd have to say those 63cc saws are indeed the ideal compromise between power and weight, and a great one-saw solution for most. If I ever sell this property and want to keep just one "all around" saw for cutting firewood or yard maintenance, it will probably be my 036.

 

[arrow]

Agreed. I bought the 63cc Stihl 036 Pro with a 20" bar years ago, after reading more than once on various forums, that this was the best configuration any firewood cutter could ever want. I found the 20" bar was a bit much for it, when you have it buried past the nose in oak, but I was able to resolve that by installing some big cutting dogs that reduced exposed bar length to about 19". That seems to be about what that displacement can handle, again when burrying the thing into 30" oak rounds.

Then I started bringing home all this enormous stuff (ever cut a Ø60-inch white oak? I have! ), and realized 63cc was just too small, and started buying bigger saws. After a few swaps (084, 056 Mag, etc.), I eventually settled on the light and fast 85cc 064 AV as the ideal compliment to the 63cc 036 Pro. It's a winning combo, that I'd probably repeat again if buying today, with an MS 362 + MS 662 (since there's no MS 642).

If not dealing with huge stuff, I'd have to say those 63cc saws are indeed the ideal compromise between power and weight, and a great one-saw solution for most. If I ever sell this property and want to keep just one "all around" saw for cutting firewood or yard maintenance, it will probably be my 036.

In full disclosure, we kept a 48” barred Husqvarna on one of our skidders for when confronting that lone wolf tree as you describe. So yes, I have cut the fatsoes who had overhanging branches 2’ in diameter.
Ever try falling one of those?
Great fun but, everything is easier with a skidder nearby.
Since logging is mostly mechanical these days, I’d like to see one of those monsters tackle that kind of tree.

 

[WinterDeere]

Since logging is mostly mechanical these days, I’d like to see one of those monsters tackle that kind of tree.

One of the channels that keeps popping up in my YouTube feed is TreeBeing, a tough but cute young blonde who makes her living as a feller in redwood country, but yeah I've also seen the showes like Axe Men where nearly all felling is done by feller bunchers and other machinery.

It seems the machinery is the economical way to go, when dealing with stands of timber up to maybe 18" or 24" diameter. But when dealing with real big stuff like redwoods, it's still all old-skool manual.

And yes, I've dropped plenty of 40" diameter trees, more than I can remember. But the 60" white oak I mentioned above was dropped for me by Hurricane Sandy. It broke off about 15 or 20 feet above the ground, and 59 inches was the diameter that high up! I did cut the remainder off the stump, even though it was mostly hollow inside down there, and the stump was big enough to park a Smart car on it.

 

[Jstpssng]

Since logging is mostly mechanical these days, I’d like to see one of those monsters tackle that kind of tree

It's not that difficult. Generally they will limb it somewhst with thd saw head before cutting. Sometimes 2 cuts are needed.

However, we encourage them to leave those big old "wolf" trees for wildlife.

 

[arrow]

One of the channels that keeps popping up in my YouTube feed is TreeBeing, a tough but cute young blonde who makes her living as a feller in redwood country, but yeah I've also seen the showes like Axe Men where nearly all felling is done by feller bunchers and other machinery.

It seems the machinery is the economical way to go, when dealing with stands of timber up to maybe 18" or 24" diameter. But when dealing with real big stuff like redwoods, it's still all old-skool manual.

And yes, I've dropped plenty of 40" diameter trees, more than I can remember. But the 60" white oak I mentioned above was dropped for me by Hurricane Sandy. It broke off about 15 or 20 feet above the ground, and 59 inches was the diameter that high up! I did cut the remainder off the stump, even though it was mostly hollow inside down there, and the stump was big enough to park a Smart car on it.

I wonder how old that grand lady was?

 

[arrow]

It's not that difficult. Generally they will limb it somewhst with thd saw head before cutting. Sometimes 2 cuts are needed.

However, we encourage them to leave those big old "wolf" trees for wildlife.

Yeah, I’d still like to see the process.
Since I’ve never been next to a large feller/buncher, I’m wondering how big a sawblade they carry?

 

[ruffdog]

Yeah, I’d still like to see the process.
Since I’ve never been next to a large feller/buncher, I’m wondering how big a sawblade they carry?

This looks like the head that the feller had when doing my trees. It would cut a 14" pine in an instant...amazing.

27B - Quadco

 

[WinterDeere]

I wonder how old that grand lady was?

The church goes back to the early 1700's, but the oldest mention I found specifically of that tree was something like 1850's. It stood over their picnic grove, and there was something in the meeting minutes from their annual summer festival about meeting under that tree. In fact, from that date (1858?) forward, the annual meeting was always under that tree.

Here's the thing: the way it was mentioned in that 1850's writing, was as if it was already a substantionally large landmark of a tree, at that time!