Extra marks on a chainsaw chain tooth

[booman]

Would you buy a chain if it had extra marks on it?  This would solve the problem of trying to keep all the teeth the same length by guessing the distance to the witness mark.  It would make it easier to keep all the teeth equidistant to the closest and same mark on each tooth because it is easier when the mark is closer.  This would mainly apply to  hand filing but could be a check for motorized sharpeners.

[beenthere]

Can't make out what is in the pic. 

[booman]

There are extra marks on a chainsaw chain tooth.  I may need to enlarge the picture.

[Wlmedley]

I think it's a good idea. Does someone make a chain marked that way? I'm bad about filing some teeth shorter than others but I've also found if I file each raker down to match tooth height chain still cuts fast and straight.

[John Mc]

Use a progresse tool for setting the depth gauge, and you don't need to worry nearly as much about keeping all of the teeth the same. I just eyeball the teeth. Even if I can see some length variation, the chain still cuts straight as long as I set the depth gauges with the progressive tool.

[Old Greenhorn]

Well, I know this is probably heresy, but I don't really care at all if my teeth are the same length. What  matters to me is that they are all sharp. I know, of course, there are tradeoffs in efficiency, but if I get a tooth that is really rocked I take it back until it is sharp and don't worry about it. I do take the raker down to match that tooth of course. I still don't quite understand how one tooth or two can get rocked and the adjacent teeth are fairly good, but somehow, magically, it happens.
I understand how folks want them all the same but the important thing is that they are sharp and I am too cheap frugal to take all the other ones back just to match a messed up tooth. YMMV and you can feel free to ridicule me all you like. I probably deserve it.  I just wanna get the wood bucked up.

[lxskllr]

I don't think randomized tooth length matters much, but if one side is consistently shorter, it can badly affect the cut. My teeth all end up shorter on one side, and I cut circles in big wood. I've been trying to pay better attention when I'm filing, but it's still a work in progress. A progressive raker gauge might help that, but I've been resistant to getting one. It would require three different gauges, and more time spent with the rakers. I'd rather correct my tooth filing than screw with that.

edit:
And for the OP... Yea, I'd like more marks on the tooth. I think it would make a few things easier in maintaining the chain. It would be easier to eyeball the distances involved. I'd pay a little more for a fully marked chain, but not a whole lot more.

[Ianab]

Exact tooth link isn't critical, unless it's uneven, then you tend to cut in a circle. But eye-o-meter sameness seems to be good enough. The way the saw teeth work is that they are constantly rocking in and out of the cut, each "dive" cuts a chip, and is controlled by the raker / depth gauge of that individual cutter. Being slightly shorter than the others doesn't make much difference to the cutting speed, as long as the raker height for each cutter is correct.  

But the problem I can see with adding more "witness marks" is they would have to  be grooves in the chrome, same as the regular mark. If you ended up sharpening exactly to the mark, you wouldn't have a sharp edge any more, you would have to grind off a bit extra to get back into clean chrome, and a sharp edge again. Pain in the backside if you are hand filing, and need to do it 3 times as much. The normal witness mark isn't a problem, because once you are worn back to that, it's time for a new chain anyway. 

[booman]

Over time, as chains are sharpened repeatedly, differences in sharpening pressure often result in one side or row of teeth becoming shorter than the other. This unevenness leads to inefficient cutting, as the saw may cut crookedly or in an arc.  My own hand-filing proves this.  It is true if you wind up on an etched mark that you would have to go past it, but the marks could be done by electrochemical or dye or stain where there is no etch.

[thecfarm]

@beenthere, might not of worked since you posted. But on this desktop, I can click onto the picture, and it gets bigger. 
Some will and some won't.

On the marks, I would not pay more. I do fine the way I do it now.
But I've been sharping for more then 40 years too.

[John Mc]

I don't think randomized tooth length matters much, but if one side is consistently shorter, it can badly affect the cut. My teeth all end up shorter on one side, and I cut circles in big wood. I've been trying to pay better attention when I'm filing, but it's still a work in progress. A progressive raker gauge might help that, but I've been resistant to getting one. It would require three different gauges, and more time spent with the rakers. I'd rather correct my tooth filing than screw with that.

Over time, as chains are sharpened repeatedly, differences in sharpening pressure often result in one side or row of teeth becoming shorter than the other. This unevenness leads to inefficient cutting, as the saw may cut crookedly or in an arc.  My own hand-filing proves this.

This is exactly the problem that a progressive depth gauge solves. To give an extreme example: I've rocked a chain or hit metal in a log and damaged cutters only on one side of the chain. I sharpened every tooth just enough to get beyond the damaged part and end up with a sharp tooth. I ended up with significantly shorter cutter lengths on the right side than on the left. I then set the depth gauges using the progressive tool. The chain still cut perfectly straight.

If I do that with a non-progressive depth gauge tool, the saw cuts on a curve. In extreme cases, the curve is tight enough that the saw will bind up as soon as the back side of the bar enters the cut. In mild cases, you can push the saw a bit to force it to cut straight, but that just seems to accelerate wear on one side of the bar, eventually making the problem worse, since now you have a chain that wants to curve to one side, added to uneven bar rails which also want to curve to that same side. Chains or bars that want to cut on a curve also increase the wear rate on the bar groove, opening up that groove over time.

With a progressive tool, the depth gauge is set in reference to the single tooth it is associated with, so each tooth takes the same size "bite" of the wood. This keeps the saw cutting straight, even if all of the teeth on one side are shorter than the other side. (Note how the tool rests on the body of the chain link on one end, and on top of the chain tooth on the other, with the depth gauge associated with that tooth poking up through the hole.)





With the non-progressive tool, such as this one

The depth gauge is set by averaging the heights of the preceding and the following tooth. (The same effect happens for someone laying a straight edge across the cutters to assess the depth gauge height.) The problem with this is that due to the sloping top plate on the cutters, if all of the cutters on one side are shorter than the others, that average height will be too high for the cutters on one side, and too low for the cutters on the other, causing the chain to cut on a curve.

The effect is even worse for a non-progressive gauge of this design:

With the saddle/filing notch all the way on one end, as it sits across two uneven cutters, that end extends out and exaggerates the difference. In the one side shorter/one side longer cutter scenario a smaller difference in length (and therefore cutter height) is magnified into a bigger difference the depth gauge setting, raising it way up on one side, and putting it way down on the other.

Yeah, I know... probably more than most of you wanted to hear on the subject.

[DHansen]

Thanks John Mc.  

[moodnacreek]

Those few who hand cut high grade saw logs and veneer and carry as short a bar as they can get away with need perfection in filing. Plunging in and partial cutting and going in from the other side and having the cuts line up requires experience and a saw that cuts fast and straight.

[beenthere]

@beenthere, might not of worked since you posted. But on this desktop, I can click onto the picture, and it gets bigger.
Some will and some won't.

On the marks, I would not pay more. I do fine the way I do it now.
But I've been sharping for more then 40 years too.

thecfarm
Thanks, you are right. It works that way now and enlarges when clicking the pic. 
I wouldn't buy a chain just for such marks, and the mark (etch whatever) on my Stihl chainsis more than enough "info" to hand file with a good angle. I sharpen at just a bit less than the etch mark angle. 
And I use the "progressive" guide as John Mc shows in his post. Works very well for me. 

[booman]

  I guess my original post was aimed more at newbies like me who have only been sharpening for 20 years.   I hand file and struggle to keep the two rows of teeth even and have often wished that there were more marks on the teeth.   I believe it would be helpful to beginners as well as well seasoned sharpeners.

[LeeB]

I seem to remember buying chains some time ago that had two marks on the cutters. I have no idea what brand it was. 

[Wlmedley]

Good info John Mc. I wondered why my saw was cutting better after switching to roller file guide and using it to set raker height.

[JD Guy]

I guess my original post was aimed more at newbies like me who have only been sharpening for 20 years.  I hand file and struggle to keep the two rows of teeth even and have often wished that there were more marks on the teeth.  I believe it would be helpful to beginners as well as well seasoned sharpeners.

I tend to believe that I am like a lot of chainsaw users in that my filing can be inconsistent from one side to the other. I think it's because of a more dominant hand on one side to the other. This is where my chain grinder comes in as I can even them up easily. I don't over grind though to take a large amount off of the shorter cutters exception being those that are badly rocked. In that case I just let the other longer cutters "catch up" to the few that were rocked. I use the Stihl progressive depth gauge and it seems to work OK for me. FWIW

[John Mc]

I use the Stihl progressive depth gauge and it seems to work OK for me.

I was not aware that Stihl made a progressive depth gauge tool. If this is the one you are using, that is not a progressive depth gauge.


I'm not sure if the depth gauge tool included on their "FG 4 Roller Filing Guide" is progressive or not. It appears that it is, but I can't see enough in their picture to determine.

[Old Greenhorn]

John what gage are you referring to? I see no photo or link for reference?

You and I seem to be walking the exact same line in our opinions both in this thread and those of years past. But I have to point out one minor point you wrote about the non-progressive gage. You said it took the average tooth height, but in fact it takes the average of the two highest teeth it lands on, which is even worse. I use the raker gage on the roller guide or I have the dedicated husky flat plate progressives. It just makes sense to set the raker height for the tooth it is controlling in the cut.

[Hilltop366]

An extra angle mark 1/2 way down the tooth would not be a bad thing for hand filing.

Some people will file a chain with less angle on the engine side of the bar and more angle on the chain cover side. 

I have a file handle with an angled tab at the file end of the handle, the angled tab should be parallel to the bar when holding the file at the correct angle. I does help some.

I see both Husq and Stihl show their own version on line now, I've had mine for years, it says Dura Max and Swiss made and has 30º and 35º angles on it.

[John Mc]

John what gage are you referring to? I see no photo or link for reference?

You and I seem to be walking the exact same line in our opinions both in this thread and those of years past. But I have to point out one minor point you wrote about the non-progressive gage. You said it took the average tooth height, but in fact it takes the average of the two highest teeth it lands on, which is even worse. I use the raker gage on the roller guide or I have the dedicated husky flat plate progressives. It just makes sense to set the raker height for the tooth it is controlling in the cut.

Not sure what happened to the picture. It was there when I previewed he post. I edited the post to add it back in.

I actually prefer the dedicated flat place Husqvarna progressive gauge to the one that is attached to the roller guide. I just find it easier to handle. I use it when in the shop. I use the one on the roller gauge if I need to address the depth gauges in the field, since it's convenient to have tbe two tools in one.

The picture in my gallery somehow got de-resolutioned to the point you can hardly tell what it is, so here is a new one. It's used just like the picture of the one on the roller gauge in reply #10 of this thread (angled in over the tooth).

[beenthere]

John Mc
I like that design too, for the reason you gave. Will make do with the attached one to the rollers. 

[booman]

While I appreciate all the info about chain sharpening,  maybe we need to start a new thread discussing different filing gauges and such.

[John Mc]

so to bring it back to your original question:

I hand file all of my chains. I would have no interest in additional witness marks on the top plate, Since matching the length of the cutters is not necessary given the way I set the gauges.

Further, depending on how those marks were made, I would be a bit concerned that I was losing some usable edge when I got to each of those marks over the life of the chain.

[beenthere]

John
The marks on the Stihl chain are far to the rear of the tooth and the "end-of-life" has been reached, as well cannot catch a fingernail on the marks so not a problem if reached with a file. One mark on the Stihl chain is plenty to keep the angle aligned, IMO when hand filing. 

[JD Guy]

I use the Stihl progressive depth gauge and it seems to work OK for me.

I was not aware that Stihl made a progressive depth gauge tool. If this is the one you are using, that is not a progressive depth gauge.


I'm not sure if the depth gauge tool included on their "FG 4 Roller Filing Guide" is progressive or not. It appears that it is, but I can't see enough in their picture to determine.

Well, all of these years I've been mistaken . Thanks for pointing this out, although my chains have always cut well.. I will source a progressive tool and assess the difference.
Thanks!

[thecfarm]

If it helps, use it. 
I myself would not use it.
But if it helps, use it. 

[teakwood]

Non of you guys is using the 2in1 filing system? since i use it i have not touched a normal handfile again. it's way faster and all the angles are done in one stoke, forget raker height. they perfect after two strokes. (for 95% of chainsaw users)

https://images.app.goo.gl/pGezEKhYmd446puA7

[JD Guy]

I bought a 2in1 a number of years ago due to the fact that my hand filing was...well not very good. It works. I did find that you could get the depth gauges too low if aggressive with the tool. I'm now better with hand filing when in the woods but do have an Oregon grinder to get all angles back to spec as mine get off some when hand filing. Also easier to clean up cutter that gets rocked or finds a nail. So, I hardly ever use my 2in1 anymore.