High Quality Chainsaw Bars Husqvarna Toys Hockfire Saws

Testing 8 9 10pin sprockets on Cannon belly bar, Cannon SBP, Tsumura

Deets066

AKA Deetsey
Local time
12:06 PM
User ID
290
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
15,442
Reaction score
73,564
Location
Illinois
Country flag
dammit now I have to lay a straight edge on both sides, you are an evil man Deets :)


Been thinkin bout this,

Once the curve of the belly bar gets through the top of the log and into the cut, the wood it's cutting will be at the same curve of the bar and chain.

A straight edge is irrelevant
 

Torinocobra

Well-Known OPE Member
Local time
9:06 AM
User ID
1226
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
23
Reaction score
43
Location
Yamhill, OR
Country flag
I would be interested in seeing the same tests done but with varying chain tension. I think mdavlee is on the right track- but maybe the problem could be overcome with more chain tension. And maybe the belly bar gets faster with less chain tension. Thanks for sharing all the great info redbull661. Your touch with the saw was very consistent as the repetitive times showed.
 

RI Chevy

Mastermind Approved!
Local time
12:06 PM
User ID
1254
Joined
May 7, 2016
Messages
27,002
Reaction score
67,778
Location
earth
Country flag
Awesome real life testing here. And the saw ran very consistent, as did the user.
 

mdavlee

Hillbilly grinder
Local time
12:06 PM
User ID
279
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
14,194
Reaction score
64,619
Location
TN
Country flag
Watch the chain on some of the bars out of the wood. There's a big gap on them and one chain was floating outside the rails for a second or two. All of that is slowing it down and robbing power when it's not running smoothly in the groove.
 

Deets066

AKA Deetsey
Local time
12:06 PM
User ID
290
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
15,442
Reaction score
73,564
Location
Illinois
Country flag
Those belly bars some are running them with 14 pins on the bigger stuff. Just have to shorten the heel a lot.
I was surprised how small in diameter the tail is on the belly bar. It's sole purpose is racing with lager sprockets. So why put a small heel on it
 

Nitroman

Super OPE Member
Local time
8:06 AM
User ID
649
Joined
Jan 22, 2016
Messages
245
Reaction score
517
Location
Southwest Alaska
When I saw something similar as this over on "the other forum" and I stated a test fixture was necessary to remove the subjectivity from the test, I was reviled as a know nothing. Seems nothing much has changed. And that was many years ago.

I know how to set up an experiment. When a good experiment is set up and described, anyone anywhere can read my methodology, do what I did (exactly), and they should get the same result. If they do not, then they cry foul. Part of peer reviewed research.

You need a fixture to hold the machine, allow it to move up and down, and be adjustable (for weight), and something to hold the throttle wide open (no hand can touch this machine while cutting), and a way to let the platen drop into the wood in a manner that won't be violent (no...you still cannot touch it). You guys are smart, so think about it. A platen held in four uprights with Delrin bushings is a good start. Take into account the leverage the bar will have on the platen when resting in the wood so it moves up and down easily. The machine should be clamped tightly into the platen. Different bars weigh more and less, so adjust the weight of the platen so it is the same with each bar. The machine is tuned so it will enter the wood at the same rpm. Atmospheric conditions should be the same. The chain should be machine sharpened as no human can sharpen a chain exactly the same each time.

A good four foot section of tall tree, regardless of species, is pretty much consistent as long as it has no big knots. Now don't go off on fast growing pine and the same pine growing reeeaaallll slow in a bog, yes they will be different density, we know this. We choose a piece of wood that is grown in the same conditions as anywhere else, otherwise we get into testing for density of wood which is a hassle. I know wood in Australia is extremely hard, so using the same chain won't work as you need a chain made to cut efficiently in extremely hard wood. Choose wood that has the same density. This is going to be the tough variable to match region to region, nation to nation. The point here is: if your test set-up is the same as mine and if the density of the wood and diameter of log is pretty much the same, you'll get the same results as I do.

A camera with time stamp records the tach so you can see when the rpm drops and then, at the end of the cut, takes off. NOW we are ready.

The entire set-up is adjusted so the front of the machine is the same distance to the wood, make it one inch (your wood is held tighly by ratchet straps). The weight of the platen is the same, the saw is tuned the same, the atmospheric conditions are the same, the chains are ground the same, the wood is the same. Now...make a cookie. Saw not in the powerband? Add a lead ingot so it is drawn down right into the middle. Re-grind that chain. Now make three cookies. Look at the recordings of the tach, the drop in rpm and increase against the time stamp.

Repeat until testing complete.

AND I wasn't knocking what this guy did, only that the results cannot be considered seriously when a human is holding the saw. I admire the desire for knowledge and the time and effort he put into this.

I will not post another comment on this subject.
 
Last edited:

Philbert

Chainsaw Enthusiast
Local time
11:06 AM
User ID
737
Joined
Jan 30, 2016
Messages
4,685
Reaction score
19,269
Location
East Dakota
Country flag
Actually, an electric saw might be better for a test fixture: easy to monitor current load, Amps, motor heating, shaft speed, etc.

But the bottom line is that none of us regularly cut in a test fixture, so home brew comparisons are OK too!

Philbert
 
Last edited:

Chainsaw Jim

Con Artist LLC
Local time
9:06 AM
User ID
836
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,014
Reaction score
90
Location
Springfield Oregon
When I saw something similar as this over on "the other forum" and I stated a test fixture was necessary to remove the subjectivity from the test, I was reviled as a know nothing. Seems nothing much has changed. And that was many years ago.

I know how to set up an experiment. When a good experiment is set up and described, anyone anywhere can read my methodology, do what I did (exactly), and they should get the same result. If they do not, then they cry foul. Part of peer reviewed research.

You need a fixture to hold the machine, allow it to move up and down, and be adjustable (for weight), and something to hold the throttle wide open (no hand can touch this machine while cutting), and a way to let the platen drop into the wood in a manner that won't be violent (no...you still cannot touch it). You guys are smart, so think about it. A platen held in four uprights with Delrin bushings is a good start. Take into account the leverage the bar will have on the platen when resting in the wood so it moves up and down easily. The machine should be clamped tightly into the platen. Different bars weigh more and less, so adjust the weight of the platen so it is the same with each bar. The machine is tuned so it will enter the wood at the same rpm. Atmospheric conditions should be the same. The chain should be machine sharpened as no human can sharpen a chain exactly the same each time.

A good four foot section of tall tree, regardless of species, is pretty much consistent as long as it has no big knots. Now don't go off on fast growing pine and the same pine growing reeeaaallll slow in a bog, yes they will be different density, we know this. We choose a piece of wood that is grown in the same conditions as anywhere else, otherwise we get into testing for density of wood which is a hassle. I know wood in Australia is extremely hard, so using the same chain won't work as you need a chain made to cut efficiently in extremely hard wood. Choose wood that has the same density. This is going to be the tough variable to match region to region, nation to nation. The point here is: if your test set-up is the same as mine and if the density of the wood and diameter of log is pretty much the same, you'll get the same results as I do.

A camera with time stamp records the tach so you can see when the rpm drops and then, at the end of the cut, takes off. NOW we are ready.

The entire set-up is adjusted so the front of the machine is the same distance to the wood, make it one inch (your wood is held tighly by ratchet straps). The weight of the platen is the same, the saw is tuned the same, the atmospheric conditions are the same, the chains are ground the same, the wood is the same. Now...make a cookie. Saw not in the powerband? Add a lead ingot so it is drawn down right into the middle. Re-grind that chain. Now make three cookies. Look at the recordings of the tach, the drop in rpm and increase against the time stamp.

Repeat until testing complete.

AND I wasn't knocking what this guy did, only that the results cannot be considered seriously when a human is holding the saw. I admire the desire for knowledge and the time and effort he put into this.

I will not post another comment on this subject.
Don't take it so personal.
You think you get flicked chit for your input, try having my opinion.
My opinion of comparing two saws to see which one cuts faster is where I lose most people because I don't think making them use the same bar and chain is a fair test. I think you should get one saw set up as fast as it can cut with whatever chain and bar combo it likes, and then get the competing saw set up the way it is best and then run them. Setting them up would be done in the same wood they would be racing with.
 

Ryan Browne

Pinnacle OPE Member
GoldMember
Local time
11:06 AM
User ID
1799
Joined
Sep 4, 2016
Messages
2,415
Reaction score
9,875
Location
Wisconsin
Country flag
Well, I know I suggested it for someone else's business idea, but I had the opportunity to beat them to the punch.

That's right, @Redbull661 just personally delivered his belly to me for inspection. Julian is making some cuts in a white pine I brought home on Friday as I write this. I'm sure we'll hear the results sometime this afternoon.

It was great get a chance to meet the man behind all the tests. Since we only live 25 miles apart I hope we'll get to do it again soon and get to spend more time running saws.

Regarding the scientific method as it applies to these tests: I think that's besides the point. Julian is having a good time running saws. I have no idea why the man sees fit to carefully time this stuff and post it up here for our reading pleasure, but I think it's cool. I have a good time reading these threads. If you're someone who doesn't enjoy them, or thinks the tests are flawed, that's cool, but the solution is simple: don't click on his threads...

I'm sure Julian would be stoked to be a part of a testing team with a lab and fancy testing machines, but to think a guy is gonna build that stuff without some serious funding is just silly. The man's just having a good time. Take what you will out of the numbers.

Anyway, before I say too much of a mouthful, I'll leave it at that. You fellers enjoy the next round of numbers. :)

Oh, and the belly definitely passed inspection. ;)
 

RI Chevy

Mastermind Approved!
Local time
12:06 PM
User ID
1254
Joined
May 7, 2016
Messages
27,002
Reaction score
67,778
Location
earth
Country flag
Cool. Amen! These tests are just real life tests, not scientific. I really enjoy and appreciate all of the work that Julian has put forth and find them useful.
You guys that want science brought in need to just keep an open mind here. These tests are conducted as fair as possible and need to be looked at as just that. These are not done in a lab, but in the field.
Keep up the good work Julian.
 

CR888

Here For The Long Haul!
Local time
4:06 AM
User ID
452
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
10,583
Location
Australia
Country flag
I know scientific testing needs constants. But in the real world of fast cut times two guys can use the same saw, bar & chain & cant and get quite different results. Many guys have probably seen this at a gtg where a talented guy can get much faster times with your saw as he has the ability to keep the saw in a state/position where it cuts the fastest. I am not sure a mechanical device could replicate such technique.
 

thomas1

┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐
Local time
12:06 PM
User ID
322
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
865
Reaction score
4,782
Location
Cristobal Colon
Country flag
I know scientific testing needs constants. But in the real world of fast cut times two guys can use the same saw, bar & chain & cant and get quite different results. Many guys have probably seen this at a gtg where a talented guy can get much faster times with your saw as he has the ability to keep the saw in a state/position where it cuts the fastest. I am not sure a mechanical device could replicate such technique.

At that point you're testing operators, not saws.
 

Keith Gandy

Maxima K2 40:1 87 Pump Gas
Local time
11:06 AM
User ID
341
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
6,219
Reaction score
16,235
Location
Provencal, Louisiana
Country flag
Don't take it so personal.
You think you get flicked chit for your input, try having my opinion.
My opinion of comparing two saws to see which one cuts faster is where I lose most people because I don't think making them use the same bar and chain is a fair test. I think you should get one saw set up as fast as it can cut with whatever chain and bar combo it likes, and then get the competing saw set up the way it is best and then run them. Setting them up would be done in the same wood they would be racing with.
I agree 100%!!!! One saw may not like the others setup! I thought I was the only 1 that thought like that
 
Top