saw selection vs. weight?

[Old Greenhorn]

I've been following along in several of the @weimedog  threads and watching his videos. Recently he mentioned how is preference is moving away from short bar, lower CC saws toward bigger blocks and longer bars. He says a 24" bar is about as short as he likes to go. Now we all have our preferences and reasons for those preferences and they are all valid. So by no means am I making a criticism here in any way. I find his reasons valid for him, but for me they don't work. None the less this started me thinking about whether my own choices are valid, or just taken with little thought, so I started to think about why we all make the choices we make. Moreover, I wondered if I had not considered all the alternative approaches to saw selection. 

 My 'system' is to chose the smallest saw that will get the job done without making me work harder to compensate for low power/cutting ability. Certainly the saw weight has to be a factor here and I realized I have no idea what my saws weigh. I am coming near to the end of getting a J'red 2050 up and running as part of the stable, and I thought it was the lightest saw I had up to now, but I wasn't really sure, so I weighed it, then I weighed my 350 to see if it is was heavier or lighter, then I weighed them all since I had the scale out. Each saw was weighed with whatever B&C lives on it because that's how I use them. Each is setup with a different purpose in mind. Each saw had some gas and oil in them, so there will be a few ounces either way. This wasn't a scientific research project, I was just trying to see what the relative 'working weight' of each saw was. The results were what I kind of expected, here's the list:

SAW------Bar Length/type--------------Weight
2050      16" OEM                                13.5#
350        18" OEM                                14.24#
450         20" OEM                               15.0#
562        24" Xtough LITE                     18.5#
372OEM  32" XTough Lite                      21#
372Clone  32" Husky std  weight           22#

 As you can see I have different bar sizes on each saw because I prefer that shortest bar that does the job well. I don't like swinging all that extra bar around. Yes, I know the shorter bar causes more bending and lord knows I want to avoid that too. But limbing trees with a 32" bar just makes it a longer job for me and on a big tree it can be harder to keep track of that bar tip.

 At my age (70 in a few hours) and my condition (I've been better) it is impossible to ignore the factors that affect how long I can work. Folks in better shape can ignore a lot of that for a long time but eventually, well, here you are.

 I don't want to start an 'oil wars' type thread (put your guns away Al). I am just wondering how others make their choices and how much 'weight' they put on saw weight and bar size vs displacement or other factors? This is something an old guy thinks about when he is trying to catch his breath at the end of the day.

[Spike60]

1st, Happy Birthday. 

2nd, I laid this topic to rest with my typical enlightened wisdom in one of Walt's 930 threads. The real world particulars for saw weight realities have never been so clearly defined before. 

[barbender]

I don't lug big saws unless I need the power, or if I can put the weight onto the bar bucking wood. My 60cc Husky 562's are what I use 95% of the time, because they cover most bases for me. 

I have a Husky 390xp that is wearing a 28" bar that I use for cutting bundles of sawmill slabs to length. Honestly one of the 562's could probably handle the that duty, but it's easier to leave that big saw with the long bar on it, and let it come out and flex it's muscles once in a while.

If I was falling some of Minnesota's bigger pine or hardwood, that 390 would get ran a lot more, probably with a 24" bar. But honestly, if I only had the 562's I could make due and probably not feel very disadvantaged.

[Old Greenhorn]

BB, it sounds like you are in the same camp as me. I don't cut a lot of big wood, but when I do, it's very nice to have a bigger saw and bar.

Now Spike, OTOH with all his enlightened wisdom kind of put it into a more meaningful picture with the post he referred to.
 Yes, Bob, I 'kind of' knew where you stood after our shop side conversation last week, and in fact, that conversation was one that may have led toward looking into this for my own self. I know Walt loves his saws for his own reasons, and if he wants to swing around 36" bars on 394's all day I say more power to him. But I am feeling a lot more feeble these recent months and looking to extend my workday. 
 I was just wondering what others were thinking. I am also waiting now, with bated breath, to see Walt's response to your post might be.

[DHansen]

Most important is easy starting, no stalling, enough power to pull the chain and bar you've selected for it, sharp as you can get it and have fun.  As for weight I can understand it, I tried short bars and small cc stuff.  Echo 2511 25cc saw.  Real nice, light weight, but it has its limits.    Falls into having the right tool for the job.  Electric saws, have two and like them, but there heavier than you would expect.  Like Barbender says 60cc is a great all around package.  And Spike with the 50-55 cc class is a getting more for less set up.  A 572XP with a 24" bar is a work horse till its not enough!  Its like why we need a 35 Rem when we already have a 32Spec.  Or a 45-70.  You just have to have those options. 

[DHansen]

Oh, and I'm glad the 288 says Lite on the side of it.   Makes me feel a lot better.  But the cowgirls make fun of me.

[thecfarm]

I have a 50cc and a 70cc, both with 18 inch bars.
I have been at their bar limit a few times. I cut my stumps low and that adds to the limit.
I do have a 28 inch bar somewhere.
I like the 18 inch bar and chain. I can sharpen it quick and when it comes to buying new, it's cheaper then a longer bar and chain.
The 50cc is easier on my body too.
As I say, the small saw may not cut as fast as the big saw, but I can cut longer becuse it does not wear me out as fast.

[SwampDonkey]

My method of choosing was 1) low end pro model 60 cc 2) short bar - 16" or 18" is fine, I'm not cutting monster wood 3) weight, 4) dependable for a few years.  I only work half days cutting firewood, the remainder of the day could be splitting and hauling or just relaxing. 

[Al_Smith]

Happy birthday .Regarding saw size I've got some  the largest displacement saws ever made but I seldom use them ..This summer however I've got a couple of larger snags to drop and chop of over 36" .That's nothing but hard work .Usully it's a 60 to 80 cc saw with a 20" to maybe 24 ".However lately I seem to enjoy a 3 cuber with a 16" because I've still got a lot of smaller blow downs .Neat thing about that you is don't have to split them .
BTW I'm 77 years old going on 25 in my mind but my bod tells me something different .Those big old Paul Bunyan saws can really get-er-down for maybe an hour at a time .Then that's enough for the day .Firewood is only around 4.5 cords a year which doesn't take that long . BTW Menards had mix oil on sale so I bought ten 8 oz bottles ,enough for 20 gallons of regular old pump gas mixed at 32 to one .<old school   forever .

This area of Ohio ,about 3 miles south of what was known as the great black swamp is flat as a pool table of rich organic soil .Some of the richest farm land in the USA .Grows great crops but doesn't drain real well .Right now the woods are like Lousiana .About the end of June is a better time .Fact yesterday I stuck the Toro zero turn mowing my two acre front yard and had to get the old 1951 Fergie out to retrieve it .A two hour job that took 3.5 .Not good fire wood time .

[thecfarm]

I have a couple wet holes here to that we mow around. Really wet here now. been raining every weekend for about 6n weeks.

[Dave Shepard]

My take on the op was what was the reason for selecting a particular saw. I have a 395XP. 20",24", and 32". I want power, reliability, power, no computers, more power, and spring suspension. I would have many 394XP and 395XP saws, if I could. I'm pretty sure it would saw ok if you put the chain on backwards. 

[g_man]

Besides firewood from thinning pole and small saw log size wood I cut a lot of 12" to 18" spruce and fir that I limb with a saw. For me it is all about weight, balance, and maneuverability. Not much need for power. A 550XP w/ a 16" bar is the go to saw. The big saw is a 359 w/ 24" bar and skip chain.

gg

[weimedog]

Saw selection... on the one side are the available running saws in my stable. The other side the task at hand. The "wild card" factor is experience.

I'm driven by the task at hand... and then pick a configuration hard knocks & experience evolved over the years to make the task the most fun & enjoyable possible. I'm retired. Work mentality ejected as my last job was.

It's hard to quantify something I either never have done or don't do...so trying to build a formula based on specs doesn't work for me, so I avoid that and let others be the selection guru's. An example:

Logic would say a hot rod 562 with punch like a 70cc saw & 24 is the "logical" choice for an old man felling 24 to 28inch diameter trees. The lightest and shortest combo that would do the task. I built a few HTSS 562's and did a video a few years back where I was felling with that combo. It worked pretty well.

Then two things happened, I discovered I LIKE building 572's & I was asked to evaluate a Blue 395.

So I went into the woods with both. Pretty quick it was obvious the "rational" by the numbers approach...sucked...as compared to the other two. And next thing I found myself just grabbing the Blue saw a little tweaked by me ( popup , Husqvarna X-Tough & c83 , muffler mod, and a few other little things ). At the end of the day I would look back and tell myself I'll run the 572's I build tomorrow....an then do the same the next day, and then next until I realized I was always going to pick the Blue saw because it simply just worked best and I wasn't nervous about abusing that saw, just worked it and made a lot of money with it. In fact was hoping for a YouTube hand grenade moment that never happened. After season three started , I knew either I needed buy a OEM 395 to move away from the Blue saws, or just find a way to force myself into a more rational approach. SO I gave the Blue saw away. Literally gave it away so my choices were 585, 372, or 572 based builds. So based on that, it would be an obvious choice to go with the 585 right? Similar weight, almost the same kind of power, smoother and all that "spec sheet right" stuff.

Nope, it's in the retirement home and I'm on the 572's  because I Liked them and I built them. Learned to get the power I want out of them like I had with the 372's years earlier. So the "intangible" I like them because I created & evolved those tweaked builds factored more then the spec sheet....yet again. ALL this was based on me actually using options developing experience vs. speculating on what I should use.

Moral of this? To each their own. And there is no wrong choice if at the end of the day there is a smile.

Firewood.... there is the space to run "play saws", and the saw I have the most fun with are ones with history important to me. That 285 has history SO does the Homelite 540. AND the Jonsered 930. I'll run them all day before I run a "spec sheet" saw defined from afar by logic based on speculation. Same as my Jonsered 70e, there is NO logic to select that saw from a sea of 572's, 372's and the like; but I've cut a lot of fire wood with my 70e. Hope that clarifies a few things. And .... I can't even imagine dropping one of the typical tree's I do with my cool little 154. Even a 272 at this point after spending the seasons on g395, 572HTSS, 372xpw & Jonsered 2175 HTSS (51.4 mm 2171 ) that I have BUT as time goes on the "fun" factor is more and more important to me Life is short.

[CJ154SG]

Rarely do hobbies and logic coincide, at least for me

Pros have a completely different end goal, generally, production. So, I can totally understand a far more pragmatic approach on their part.

For me, approaching chainsaws as a hobby that is easily justified by the obtaining of firewood leads to all sorts of "Intangibles":

1) The joy of rescuing/resurrecting an old, yet capable tool and then using said tool to keep our garage warm all winter.

2) Optimizing such a tool with all of the anal-retentiveness only the hobbyist can afford because my livelihood doesn't remotely depend upon it.

3) The hobbyist's luxury of falling completely in love with a saw that makes absolutely no "logical" sense, as Walt pointed out, because of some combination of characteristics that I can provide no justification for, and frankly don't care to

And usually, with me, it's all 3 combined.

Case in point: last fall I backed into a McCulloch Pro Mac 570 picked up at an auction by my Dad's former co-worker for us to check over and see if it would run. I had never given Macs a second glance before and there was no logical reason for this saw to change that: it's overweight (18.5 lbs w/ 16" B&C), grossly underpowered for that weight (58cc; maybe 3 1/4hp on a good day), a gas hog (same carb as the 82cc Pro Mac 850 it shares its chassis with), and was technologically outclassed years before it came along in 1977. A big (literally), stupid, yellow saw. And all it took was a squirt of mix down the carb for the stupid thing to fire. Next thing I know, I'm turning to my Dad and asking if he thought the co-worker would let me have it for what he paid for it. Who's stupid, now??

The stupid thing fires cold & runs on the second pull nearly every time, it purrs like a big, fluffy, yellow cat at idle, and then sounds like a stupid, obnoxious go-kart (at least, according to my Dad ) when you lay it into a log. And I can use that stupid, 80cc-sized, spike to dog it in without stalling it.

Which then leads to #2 mentioned above: Obviously, if I can't stall the saw with a 7-pin rim, it's just begging for an 8-pin to give me a little more chain speed...the original 16" McCulloch-branded (Windsor Speed-Tip) bar is a little shy on balancing the enormous bulk of the saw, so on goes a new 20" Versacut (lighter than the solid 16" Mac bar but with more leverage)...oh, and what if I blow this artifact up? Better find a spare piston and rings...and so it continues

Which finally leads to #1 above: Now, I can't leave the stupid thing home whenever we go to the firewood patch, even though it displaces another saw that will eat its lunch and throw the bag back in its face. When we get there, I have to run at least a tank through it. And it's a good thing I have my face shield down most of the time, because I can't wipe this big, stupid grin off my face every time I drop this big, stupid saw onto a log and let its sheer mass self-feed it though the cut.

Which is my long-winded, over-analyzed way of agreeing with Walt about FUN

[Spike60]

Working the vintage saws into the discussion certainly turns a lot of accepted logic upside down, huh? Loved that Mac story. In addition to the Jonny 70E, Walt and I also have a thing for Homelite 925's. No logic there. No AV either. But they possess what we call a personality that ups the fun factor, which enhances the work factor. And what I love about the vintage saws, is that they all have a unique exhaust note. Not like a truck load of modern saws that all sound alike. 

Back to weight; on some jobs it's far less important than others. There's was a day up there where we busted down a lot of big scraps into firewood. Lot of noodling. I had an 830, 930, Homelite 550, and that 285 that I was happy to pass in to Walt. All with 24" bars. Whole project was right next to our trucks. Didn't have to carry the saws anywhere; just start em up and lay them on the wood. The weight was never a factor. 

[DHansen]

Great post CJ.  Wish you, Bob and Walt were near by. 

[longtime lurker]

I look for balance in a saw rather then worry about the overall weight. A well balanced saw you can carry all day, a saw that's badly balanced is a chore that catches every bit of vegetation you walk past.  And I want enough bar to cover most of my stumps without shifting my feet more than necessary.

Beyond that I want power. When I was logging I was paid by the ton, or nowadays if I'm in the bush I'm a man on a mission to get logs on the ground to keep a mill fed.  I expect to be tired and sore by end of day (and as I spend less time logging that's a bigger and bigger thing... I'm not job fit anymore).  If I'm going to be tired and sore I want to be tired and sore and have a lot of timber on the deck. I'll lug a few extra pounds all day if it gets me more coin in the pocket.

So fundamentally I select bar length to suit task then put the biggest powerhead I can on it so that it's balanced either neutral or slightly nose heavy. The last 10 years of open forest logging that's been a 395/28"/.404 combination 9 days out of 10.  The other day we're in the jungle and we take a big saw to work.

[CJ154SG]

Working the vintage saws into the discussion certainly turns a lot of accepted logic upside down, huh? Loved that Mac story. In addition to the Jonny 70E, Walt and I also have a thing for Homelite 925's. No logic there. No AV either. But they possess what we call a personality that ups the fun factor, which enhances the work factor. And what I love about the vintage saws, is that they all have a unique exhaust note. Not like a truck load of modern saws that all sound alike.

Back to weight; on some jobs it's far less important than others. There's was a day up there where we busted down a lot of big scraps into firewood. Lot of noodling. I had an 830, 930, Homelite 550, and that 285 that I was happy to pass in to Walt. All with 24" bars. Whole project was right next to our trucks. Didn't have to carry the saws anywhere; just start em up and lay them on the wood. The weight was never a factor.

Very true, Bob. That Pro Mac 570 is only used for bucking, where the weight is an advantage, rather than a hindrance.

+1 on the way old (particularly horizontal-cylinders, in my case) saws sound and pull in the wood. Along with the Mac, I have managed to accumulate 3 horizontal-cylinder Shindaiwas from the mid-'80s that blow the later vertical-cylinder saws away when it comes to the exhaust note. Even though they weigh an extra 2 pounds more on average versus their successors, I still can't put them down. They have this great little pop-pop at idle that turns into more snarl than you ever thought a sub-40cc saw would be capable of and they pull like baby freight trains.

The pattern is getting predictable with me: older, heavier, horizontal-cylinder saw comes along (it does have to have AV, as my fingers simply won't tolerate a non-AV saw for more than a couple minutes), I fall in love with the sound and way it feels in my hands...and it finds its way into the back of the truck more often than not

[CJ154SG]

I look for balance in a saw rather then worry about the overall weight. A well balanced saw you can carry all day, a saw that's badly balanced is a chore that catches every bit of vegetation you walk past.  And I want enough bar to cover most of my stumps without shifting my feet more than necessary.

Beyond that I want power. When I was logging I was paid by the ton, or nowadays if I'm in the bush I'm a man on a mission to get logs on the ground to keep a mill fed.  I expect to be tired and sore by end of day (and as I spend less time logging that's a bigger and bigger thing... I'm not job fit anymore).  If I'm going to be tired and sore I want to be tired and sore and have a lot of timber on the deck. I'll lug a few extra pounds all day if it gets me more coin in the pocket.

So fundamentally I select bar length to suit task then put the biggest powerhead I can on it so that it's balanced either neutral or slightly nose heavy. The last 10 years of open forest logging that's been a 395/28"/.404 combination 9 days out of 10.  The other day we're in the jungle and we take a big saw to work.

100% agree. A heavier, properly balanced saw beats a lighter one with poor balance, for me, any day. When light weight and balance happen to converge with proper capability for the task at hand, its money