electric saw for cutting logs?

[sheepish]

I've been given a pile of split logs for use on log burner but several are too long. What is the most suitable saw for cutting the 3-4" wide logs in half? I have a fear of chainsaws (blame a misspent youth watching horror films) so winded whether there was anything else suitable. Haven't got much cash to spend and haven't got a workbench so would have to cut on the patio. Oh and can't be anything too heavy as can't lift due to injury!!!

Thanks in anticipation

Sheepish.

 

[AJB Temple]

If it is not too many, then a one man crosscut saw will do the job as would a biggish bow saw.

An electric chain saw (or even one of the battery powered ones - they are getting quite good now) will do the job. Many people find electric chainsaws much less scary than petrol ones.

 

[Woody2Shoes]

Depending on how many you've got to do - and I appreciate the question was about electric - I'd use a Bahco 30 inch bowsaw with a raker blade specifically designed for greenwood. I find this much quicker/easier/safer/cheaper/healthier than machine tools in most cases (I'm happy cutting ten or twenty logs with one of these, and it keeps you fit!), but make sure your left hand is well away from the cut(!). The words knife and butter spring to mind.

http://www.abbeygardensales.co.uk/subpr ... 03707.aspx

also

http://www.wilko.com/hand-tools/wilko-t ... vt/0344221

If you really feel the need for an electric one, then I think that Makita and Bosch do perfectly good electric chainsaws.

Cheers, W2S

PS IMHO an electric chainsaw has pretty much the same potential (pun intended) to be dangerous as a petrol one.

 

[Beau]

How about this style of machine http://www.screwfix.com/p/woodstar-sw41 ... andscaping%2

 

[Wildman]

Just bought the parkside electric chainsaw from Lidl and it seems really goodcut an 18" dia tree no problem how long it will last is another matter not had a lot of joy to date with parkside stuff.

 

[blackrodd]

If it is not too many, then a one man crosscut saw will do the job as would a biggish bow saw.

An electric chain saw (or even one of the battery powered ones - they are getting quite good now) will do the job. Many people find electric chainsaws much less scary than petrol ones.

+ 1 For the above, cheapest would be an electric chainsaw, much less maintainance than any petrol saw, and handy for
you're part time use as well as making home log sawing worth while in respect to you're pocket.
A 400mm model will do what you want for logging.
DON'T buy any shed models, ever!, keep to BOSCH, MAKITA ETC, at least, and around £80 onwards,
Don't forget the chain oil!
HTH Regards Rodders

 

[DrPhill]

Depending on how many you've got to do - and I appreciate the question was about electric - I'd use a Bahco 30 inch bowsaw with a raker blade specifically designed for greenwood. I find this much quicker/easier/safer/cheaper/healthier than machine tools in most cases (I'm happy cutting ten or twenty logs with one of these, and it keeps you fit!), but make sure your left hand is well away from the cut(!). The words knife and butter spring to mind.

+1 for the bow saw. I used to have a chainsaw, but as well as been somewhat scary it was heavy. Have to put it down every time I adjust the log on the saw horse. Best to turn it off too. The start it up again......

I imagine that with one of those saw horse attachments that hold the chainsaw and allow it to pivot then the danger and weight worries would be neutralised.

So I use a bow saw (never heard of raker blades....). Light, mostly safe, low investment. Ten or so cuts then a break to do something else suits me.

 

[Paul200]

I've got petrol and electric chainsaws and agree that they both have the ability to sever your leg/face/whatever. I use them both regularly and would say that the electric version is possibly more dangerous purely because it doesn't make so much noise and lulls you into false security. I prefer the scariness of the petrol machine - it keeps me alert to the danger. If you do buy an electric one though, please buy a known brand (as already said - Makita, Bosch etc). They're dangerous enough without adding 'rubbish quality and build' to the mix.

If you don't have much to do I'd stick to a bowsaw.

 

[RobinBHM]

Ive got a titan chainsaw from screwfix, surprisingly much more solid and powerful than the makita it replaced.

One great feature is the clutch, release the trigger and the blade stops imnediately before the motor stops turning.

I dont know if mine is the same as the current model though, so cant be sure it has same build quality.

 

[RobinBHM]

I would just add though, In general its best to heed Rodders advise -stick to brands for chainsaws. I chose the titan after seeing some reviews online but I wouldnt trust most cheap brands.

 

[duncanh]

And if you do buy a chainsaw make sure that you also buy protective leg wear, footwear, gloves, ear and eye protection (usually fastened to a helmet).
Given that you're likely to be untrained I'd say that these are essential. Unfortunately they're likely to cost more than a basic electric saw and a lot of people won't bother.

I tend to agree with what Paul200 wrote - electric saws can be more dangerous because they work similarly to regular power tools, which lulls people into thinking that they're a bit safer. Yes, the chain stops as soon as you take your finger off the trigger but it can still do a lot of damage.

I'm currently using an electric one from Aldi (for when I can't be bothered starting my petrol ones) and it's surprisingly good and cheap, coming with a 3 year warranty.

If you go for a bow saw (which I'd suggest for logs this size given the cheap price and ease of use/lightness), get one with the correct blade. Rakers have already been mentioned - something similar to this one. If the saw doesn't come with one just get a replacement blade. It makes a surprising amount of different, especially when cutting green wood.

Alternatively for a smaller, even lighter saw which will take up less room when stored try a silky saw or similar. Silkys are pricey but excellent. They can give very nasty wounds though (parallel teeth giving a very wide cut which take ages to heal).

 

[Sheffield Tony]

If you go for a bow saw (which I'd suggest for logs this size given the cheap price and ease of use/lightness), get one with the correct blade. Rakers have already been mentioned - something similar to this one. If the saw doesn't come with one just get a replacement blade. It makes a surprising amount of different, especially when cutting green wood.

My understanding might be faulty, but those raker teeth look mostly for show to me. As I understand it, raker teeth on a crosscut saw are set just below the tips of the regular cutting teeth, so their tips score each side of the kerf, and the raker like a chisel cleans out the separated material. Those are so high up they won't touch anything !

I think I've made my feelings about bow saws known already. I'm willing to accept the possiblity that good ones might exist, but the common sort are not very effective. The tooth line being below the line through the two mounting holes in the saw blade means any downward pressure and it won't saw straight. But the cheap saws are so light that they don't make much impression without downward pressure. Combined with poor blade clamping and inadequate tension, they are just a source of frustration. I threw mine in the metal skip and bought a 1 man crosscut from Thomas Flinn. Once properly sharpened thay are fairly good.

 

[Shrubby]

Reciprocating saws work (with a good blade S1531L ) or a building block saw like the Bosch tyranosaw? gfz 14-45a
bow saws and hand crosscut saws allwork if you don't like the idea of chainsaws
Matt

 

[duncanh]

If you go for a bow saw (which I'd suggest for logs this size given the cheap price and ease of use/lightness), get one with the correct blade. Rakers have already been mentioned - something similar to this one. If the saw doesn't come with one just get a replacement blade. It makes a surprising amount of different, especially when cutting green wood.

My understanding might be faulty, but those raker teeth look mostly for show to me. As I understand it, raker teeth on a crosscut saw are set just below the tips of the regular cutting teeth, so their tips score each side of the kerf, and the raker like a chisel cleans out the separated material. Those are so high up they won't touch anything !

A quick search seems to indicate that all bowsaw blades for green timber look the same, with raker teeth shorter than the regular teeth. Have a look at this which I just found from the US Forestry Service. The picture part way down shows the rakers as shorter. I guess that makes sense - if the raker extends above the cutters then they'll be trying to rake out fibers which haven't yet been cut.

I think I've made my feelings about bow saws known already. I'm willing to accept the possiblity that good ones might exist, but the common sort are not very effective. The tooth line being below the line through the two mounting holes in the saw blade means any downward pressure and it won't saw straight. But the cheap saws are so light that they don't make much impression without downward pressure. Combined with poor blade clamping and inadequate tension, they are just a source of frustration. I threw mine in the metal skip and bought a 1 man crosscut from Thomas Flinn. Once properly sharpened thay are fairly good.

We use bowsaws regularly at work (with the Wildlife Trust). I think they're made by Bacho and most are fitted with the wet wood blades. If you make sure that you change the blade when they get blunt and make sure that they're tensioned correctly (our models have a screw tensioner) then they work well. In the past I've used them for felling 6"+ diameter oak trees without too many problems. We also use them fairly regularly for cutting gorse and it goes through pretty well.

 

[paulm]

If you go for a bow saw (which I'd suggest for logs this size given the cheap price and ease of use/lightness), get one with the correct blade. Rakers have already been mentioned - something similar to this one. If the saw doesn't come with one just get a replacement blade. It makes a surprising amount of different, especially when cutting green wood.

My understanding might be faulty, but those raker teeth look mostly for show to me. As I understand it, raker teeth on a crosscut saw are set just below the tips of the regular cutting teeth, so their tips score each side of the kerf, and the raker like a chisel cleans out the separated material. Those are so high up they won't touch anything !

A quick search seems to indicate that all bowsaw blades for green timber look the same, with raker teeth shorter than the regular teeth. Have a look at this which I just found from the US Forestry Service. The picture part way down shows the rakers as shorter. I guess that makes sense - if the raker extends above the cutters then they'll be trying to rake out fibers which haven't yet been cut.

I think I've made my feelings about bow saws known already. I'm willing to accept the possiblity that good ones might exist, but the common sort are not very effective. The tooth line being below the line through the two mounting holes in the saw blade means any downward pressure and it won't saw straight. But the cheap saws are so light that they don't make much impression without downward pressure. Combined with poor blade clamping and inadequate tension, they are just a source of frustration. I threw mine in the metal skip and bought a 1 man crosscut from Thomas Flinn. Once properly sharpened thay are fairly good.

We use bowsaws regularly at work (with the Wildlife Trust). I think they're made by Bacho and most are fitted with the wet wood blades. If you make sure that you change the blade when they get blunt and make sure that they're tensioned correctly (our models have a screw tensioner) then they work well. In the past I've used them for felling 6"+ diameter oak trees without too many problems. We also use them fairly regularly for cutting gorse and it goes through pretty well.

That's pretty much my experience too Duncan. They are a good tool for cutting up smaller dimension green wood, and with the appropriate blade, dryer logs, for firewood. Of course they are not particularly accurate or straight cutting, but that's not something I want when rough cutting firewood, I want speed and ease of use.

Cheers, Paul

 

[Sheffield Tony]

If you go for a bow saw (which I'd suggest for logs this size given the cheap price and ease of use/lightness), get one with the correct blade. Rakers have already been mentioned - something similar to this one. If the saw doesn't come with one just get a replacement blade. It makes a surprising amount of different, especially when cutting green wood.

My understanding might be faulty, but those raker teeth look mostly for show to me. As I understand it, raker teeth on a crosscut saw are set just below the tips of the regular cutting teeth, so their tips score each side of the kerf, and the raker like a chisel cleans out the separated material. Those are so high up they won't touch anything !

A quick search seems to indicate that all bowsaw blades for green timber look the same, with raker teeth shorter than the regular teeth. Have a look at this which I just found from the US Forestry Service. The picture part way down shows the rakers as shorter. I guess that makes sense - if the raker extends above the cutters then they'll be trying to rake out fibers which haven't yet been cut.

There's a more comprehsive document on 2 man saw sharpening and setting here. According to that source and others I've seen, the rakers should be shorter by between 8 and 30 thou (0.2 - 0.75 mm), so that they clear away the fibres just severed by the tip of the cutting teeth. To my eye, the rakers on that Bacho blade are a lot shorter - can't imagine they do much.

 

[paulm]

There's a more comprehsive document on 2 man saw sharpening and setting here. According to that source and others I've seen, the rakers should be shorter by between 8 and 30 thou (0.2 - 0.75 mm), so that they clear away the fibres just severed by the tip of the cutting teeth. To my eye, the rakers on that Bacho blade are a lot shorter - can't imagine they do much.

The raker teeth on that blade may or may not be optimum for the purpose, but they clearly will do a lot of clearing of the cut.

Perhaps they could do more clearing if a millimetre or so slightly longer, I don't know, but it seems illogical and unreasonable to me to dismiss them as not doing much at all.

They seem to work perfectly adequately for me at least, perhaps they could be better still, but I suspect it would be hard to make any meaningful improvements that would be noticeable in practice for cutting up firewood logs.

Cheers, Paul

 

[MIGNAL]

A couple of years ago I made a wooden frame saw using the Japanese universal blade available from Fine Tools. Initially I wanted to try it for hand resawing but it proved to be a bit cumbersome for that particular use. I then used it for crosscut sawing of firewood, not logs but old dry joists, some of which were around 12" x 5". It easily outperformed the Bahco saw that I have and I tried both green and dry wood blade types. It seems to me as though some of the problem associated with these types of saw are not getting enough tension in the blade. I've also noticed that they lose set (over time) as the saw is used. The Japanese blade isn't really suitable for log cutting but Fine Tools also do a 'Farmers blade' that looks like it has very coarse teeth. It's fairly cheap too. Filed crosscut and it might be suitable for logs that aren't too large in diameter (maybe 6 or 7"), although I've not tried this particular blade so I'm guessing. Next time I put in an order I'll buy this blade and try it. The worst that it can do is be suitable for dry wood/joists.
BTW ECE make a similar frame saw to the one that I made.

 

[duncanh]

There's a more comprehsive document on 2 man saw sharpening and setting here. According to that source and others I've seen, the rakers should be shorter by between 8 and 30 thou (0.2 - 0.75 mm), so that they clear away the fibres just severed by the tip of the cutting teeth. To my eye, the rakers on that Bacho blade are a lot shorter - can't imagine they do much.

I went into the workshop yesterday to inspect the blades (those already fitted to the saws and the spares, which were in Bacho logo'd packaging). I didn't have much in the way of measuring equipment but placed a ruler across the points of the teeth. The rakers appeared to be approx. 0.5mm shorter than the regular teeth.
I don't need to imagine either way whether they do or don't work because I know that they do, as do all the other staff and volunteers who use them.

 

[Sheffield Tony]

Fair enough, 0.5mm is in the middle of the range. I quoted. In the picture linked earlier it looked to me to be more than that; mind you that was a Roughneck branded blade rather than Bacho - but maybe they are the same.