@@elpolaco7654 I will try and set it up on some 90PX sometime this week, it's going to be hard but I'll try. I think I keep getting the 1/5 from the Oregon manuals and keep mentioning it by mistake. Honestly I don't know how much of the file I have above, I just go by what looks right and check the side plate angle when I'm done. Probably not the right way of doing it but it works for me

The whole thing gets even more complicated from here. Stihl RM isn't a fast cutting semi chisel compared to some others I used that week. We can close the gap up a bit more with the right chain. The next problem is how fast a full chisel starts dropping that speed advantage. I want to test this more but from previous attempts, a full chisel will lose approximately 5-7% of that speed advantage in 1 tank of fuel. If the aim is to cut as much as possible in half or a full day, I believe you will get more done with a semi chisel. Just for reference, that saw running a 25 inch hard nose bar with carlton 404 semi cuts that same log in about 14.5 seconds and the chain needs a touch up after 4 or 5 tanks.

Hi@@SawChainTheories Thanks for the reply A Qld pro who I recall was called Laurie did years of experimentation and came to his experience/evidence based conclusion that his go to chain was Carlton Semi. He even had a preferred angle of between 30 and 25 deg for the top plate - if memory serves correctly. This fits with you finding Carlton 404 semi gets closer to full chisel speed. Note: I imagine, 404 semi compared to 3/8 full chisel involves a longer rocking cutter, which with other angles kept the same will rock such that it takes a deeper bite, or so I think? only a little deeper but it will enable a powerful chainsaw to put more power through each tooth as it rocks into the wood. Increasing pitch changes the base length that takes part in the efficient rocking motion. I don't know but I expect this is why increasing pitches are matched to increasing power of saws?? Anyway, I went for Carlton semi years ago based on Laurie's experience. I've found it holds its edge well, especially since doing more cutting in clean wood. BUT I don't really know much because I haven't used much other chain. At the rate I use chain/sprockets it'll be some time till I need to replace what I'm using. I expect the sprocket to wear out before my current chains are done. _(1 or 2 passes of the file using my Stihl FG2 is all it usually takes me to get sharp now. If I haven't changed the depth the guide goes exactly into the tooth profile)_ With my next sprocket/chain set I'll be even better at not excessively loading the sprocket and it might last for more of my next set of chains. In the overall process of saw chain comparison with emphasis on time getting things done, (and having fun) I might get 3 loops of semi and 1 of full chisel next, just to get hands on experience of the difference. And in a year or 2 I might get a MS 400. It'll get me close to the 70cc class of a 462 - though just a little lighter and smoother but in most of my cutting, which is smaller diameter stuff, not significantly slower. But a different class compared to my current 55cc, MS 291. I suspect Ray Carlton really knew what he was doing in designing and patenting his Semi Chisel and that's what is behind it's sweet spot of cutting performance and edge retention. I sharpen mine at 35deg top plate and I approach the tooth from 5 deg down. It seems I generally get 3 full tanks before I sometimes start subconsciously pushing to maintain speed of cut, but sometimes I get 4 or 5 tanks in fairly soft but well dried 'Dunns White' gum. I'm getting better at changing chains as soon as efficient cutting under the weight of the saw is lost. I’m teaching myself to let the saw do it all. At the moment I don't have a wood splitter. That's the next piece of kit to most improve productivity for me. That and strengthening the weakness in my left arm, if it wasn't weak I'd be planning for a 462 not a 400, also hand circulation. Anyway, I'm sure you've got better things to do than read my waffling on Cheers d

I agree with you, the main reason I bought this was curiosity. The economics of it stack up differently here, Tecomec green wheels are $74, which is just insane, but I still could have could bought 3 of those for the price of this wheel. More likely I would have bought 6 boxes of Vallorbe 5.5mm files for the same price. The total cost of the grinder and wheel is the same as buying a Tecomec Jolly Evo here, that's how I justified it to myself. I really don't know if the rough surface finish on the cutter has a significant effect and don't really know how to prove or disprove it. I can test initial cutting speed against one with a smoother finish but suspect its biggest difference might be in durability and it is much harder to test because I can't completely control what they cut.

I really want to try it on a grinder with the hydraulic clamp because it would be really quick to work through a chain. If you have a thermometer can you test to see how much heat builds up on the cutter when grinding? I'm surprised it barely changed at all with this.

That bar has 520mm Infront of the spikes, so yes somewhere in the 450mm range. It's an oval shape and the pic I have with the saw on top the bar tip isn't past the log when vertical. Might post it later but the difference between new C85 and sharpened 35RS is 0.03 seconds when averaged over 3 cuts. It's a great chain but it isn't fast in this wood in its factory shape, but holly crap is it nice to use. Very, very smooth and fantastic to file. It's a shame it's not made in 1.6mm

The file makes it. It's so much easier to get a good sharpening result with the Hexa file that it is worth it. A massive difference between them was quality control. The RM took 28 seconds to make 1 cut when new. The grind on the RS was terrible as well. The only one that cut any good when new was the Hexa.

@@SawChainTheories I get you. I've just heard the pricing for files is through the roof

@@michaelnorth8602 yes they cost about the same has 6 good round files unfortunately. I bought the Hexa in a kit with 2 chains and a file for the same price as 2 RS chains. If the file will last through both chains it's not too bad. Loose it or break it and it's going to be expensive

@@SawChainTheories Im cheap, Im going to wait for a knock off cheap hexa file before using it. I'll stick with my 2% slower round filed chain until then.

​@@nseric1233It really depends on your ability with a round file. I might put up some other videos in the next few weeks but that same RS chain, filed with a 2 in 1 sharpener slows down 5-6%. A Stihl flat file guide slows it down another 3-4% again. If you are good with a file, there's no real benefit but I think most people would do a better job with a hexa file. I'm on the fence with it. I now only have 1 Hexa chain and probably won't buy more.

Stay with the S85 it's fantastic. Had 4 different 3/8 058 semi's with me and the S85 is the fastest cutting, Oregon DX is slower, slightly smoother and is the most durable. Stihl RM, I used to love it but when it's ran back to back with the others it was crap. Chatters and is rough cutting compared to the others. Had some Prokut stuff there as well, it's ok for the money but not great.

@@SawChainTheories Roger that mate.

That's it's first ever cut out the box. The quality control people must have had the week off when it was made.

Perhaps I can ask more directly: what must change during the sharpening performed by you that the chain starts to cut noticeably better?

This is a really bad job done at the factory mixed with a few hard cutters. Depth gauges are inconsistent, the grind is done something like a Hexa shape and just doesn't work. This pissed me off more than the RM because it's been such a great chain over the years. If I had 1 with me I would fix this with a 1/4 file but instead I'm stuck making 6 to 8 strokes with a 7/32 before the file actually fits into the cutter enough to start sharpening it. They recommend it to be 30, 65 side and 55 top plate cutting angle. I have run it at 30/85/60 for years because it works so much better than way.

Essa,, 0h..l?, b.uex👟.,pp,loppi

@@elpolaco7654 jjarmpb

That's a good explanation of what might be occurring here. I have had mixed results with skip but for the most part it's reaction is inline with what you said. I don't have a conclusion as such, all I have really learnt over the last few days is, cutting speed is probably the least important factor in chain choice. I'm willing to leave speed behind for less reaction force and vibration, especially as the day goes on.

@@SawChainTheories What species of tree is this, if you don't mind me asking?

@@elpolaco7654 this is a hard question. I think it's official name is Eucalyptus macrorhyncha. It's commonly known as red stringy bark. The problem is there is over 900 species of eucalyptus so it's hard to be sure

@@SawChainTheories Thank you. It's hard to be sure about the species, but I'm pretty sure this wood must be really hard...

@@elpolaco7654 It's definitely not the hardest of wood here. It can change dramatically tree to tree depending on where it grows. This one was on a ridge line and it's much harder than some of the others growing 300m away. The type of tree I was cutting with the 16 inch bar on the 288 is regarded as a much harder wood but had grown in the bottom of a small valley, in good soil with lots of moisture. It was much easier to cut than this

If I remember correctly, I think it was no more than 1/3 .But I agree with your reasoning.

It's about a 1/3 through. The width of that Oregon is the same as some other 3/8 bars I have. It only does this on some types of trees and only when green.

So far it's only Hexa that's done it to me. In That same piece of wood I tried with a 21lpx that's over half worn and it worked ok. I'm not sure if it's that bar or not. I'm out cutting now for the week and bought a 84dl Hexa just to try something with it so I should be able to give a better answer in a day or 2. I have a ridiculous amount of different chains with me this time to try and work a few things out. If there's anything you want to see let me know, have a dcs460, ms310, 288 clone, 660 and the 880 with me. Can run the same bar and chains on the 310, 288 and 660.

@@SawChainTheories When it comes to Hexa all I can think of is the relationship of chain width to bar thickness. Perhaps for good reason, Oregon for NK chains also has special NK bars. I wonder if actually increasing the sharpening angle from 25 to 30° or even 35° could make a difference here.

That's what I'm thinking as well but want to try them for a while to find out. It is very similar in shape to some of Oregon's micro chisel chains but, for reasons I don't understand, Oregon doesn't offer a micro in 3/8. They do in 325 and 404

Which part, the LP being different or the different semi shapes? 3/8LP is strange with the sizes changing in the same gauge as well as with when changing the gauge. The numbering system for it makes no sense to me either. Add to that the "L" in VXL is for long, but it's kind of short compared to others. It's a complicated size

I don't think so. I have always stressed that each type of chain has to be treated individually. They can have different geometries, different kerf widths and so on. That is why, for example, one file size does not always have to be recommended for a given chain size, understood as a pitch and whether it is a low profile type chain. For example, for 90 PX, which is described by Oregon as a narrow kerf, has a pitch of 3/8, a 1.1 mm gauge and is of the low-profile type, a 4.5 mm file is recommended instead of the usual 4 mm for 3/8 LP chains. This does not change the fact that the cutters of "normal" 3/8 or .325 Stihl or Oregon chains are the same. Because they are the same "type", whereas they will differ in the thickness of the drive link to work with different types of guide bars.

@@SawChainTheories It seems to me that the VXL teeth are longer than other Oregon 91 (3/8 LP) products such as the VX, P, PX.

Yep noticed that when it was too late to fix. Old NC1 is close to VXL, that new one is tiny and look like 043

Ah, thinking about it a little more it seems the depth gauge being rounded will allow it to gradually roll and take the leading edge out the wood, making for a smoother cut. Not really a mirror of the heel but benefiting from the rounding. It's a lot of fun thinking about this stuff.

Actually, I should ask what was the thickness of the chips in both cases and was there a difference? If the thickness was less than 0.65 mm, then probably the difference in depth gauges height didn't matter much.

I watched that video and really hope he does more with those guys. They made some good points, especially about balancing the whole setup, it's easy to push to far and go backwards. I didn't measure chips when I tried, so I can't answer that. Best I can say there is I don't know. I'm still trying to figure out why chainging the depth gauge high didn't have the effect I thought it would. It's a 79cc, 6+HP saw with a 60DL chain. It should have reacted differently. I can only put it down to the way I shape the depth gauge allowing it to be pulled into the wood more efficiently. If we take the 0.65 vs the soft setting it's a big change in the angle (3.3 to 4.9). If it's critical to cutting, it should change something. You'll see a few more videos soon. I bought 6 different 3/8, 058, 72DL chains. 2 full and 4 semi and the 4 semi chisels all have a different cutter profile. I want to show how bad some of the factory grinds are and to see how the difference semi shapes change their cutting performance. Suprisingly, the worst of the new grinds come from a big name, the cheapest chain did a decent job.

@@SawChainTheories If I am not mistaken in the formula in my previous comment you would have to have a really high feed velocity (i.e. push really hard) to approach the maximum chip thickness determined by the difference in tooth and depth gauges heights. I assumed that the piece being machined was about 30 cm thick. Did I get that much wrong? Obviously a major simplification also due to the circular shape of the cut piece: feed-velocity = 3 cm/s = 0.03 m/s cutting-velocity = 15 m/s chain pitch = 3/8'' = 3/8 * 25.4 mm = 9.525 mm = 0.009525 m tooth-spacing = 8 depth-of-cut = (0.03 m/s / 15 m/s) * 0.009525 m * 8 = 0.0001524 m = 0.1524 mm You can use more close to the true values that you have observed in practice...

Yep, the Stihl one

Kickback doesn't really change between them. If you are looking for a great explanation on how it occurs and general safety, search for Dan Tilton chainsaw safety on KZfaq. It's from the early 80's and goes for an hour but there is a lot of incredibly good information in the video. Even watching what I did here, you can see my left thumb resting on the handle instead of being wrapped around. Thats a bad habit I picked up somewhere over the years and I need to think about it when using a saw to stop myself doing it. Power wise, it's a bit of a wash. Full chisel is doing more work in a pass clearing the fibres in go, semi has a few bites at the wood to achieve the same thing. FC needs more power but is also more efficient, so it balances out. For the work you're doing I would stay with the semi. All of this is a bit of a hobby for me now, when I was making money running a saw, all I ran was semi chisel because I spent more time cutting wood and less time sharpening chains. The cutting speed shown here has more to do with throwing horsepower at the problem than the chain.

Hi@@SawChainTheories Thank you very much for the reply, appreciated! Yes I looked up that beast, almost 90cc. I've still got the better part of 4 loops semi chisel to use up before I need to worry about new chain. I decided on Carlton semi chisel years ago after reading the experienced experimental advice of someone called Laurie in Qld. Since getting a Stihl FG2, sharpening has generally become a pleasure, though it still takes some time to do 4 loops @ 40 teeth each. Found the Dan Tilton video, have saved it. Breakfast is done, back to doing things, will watch Dan on breaks through the day. Cheers sincerely d

I'm still shocked I had a 050 RM chain. I can only guess the factory copied a NK chain and started making that. I have some work lined up for the little saw in the next few weeks, I'll try and get some video of it

@@SawChainTheories If you had Oregon at 050 or 058 and 063 gauges, it might be a good idea for a video to show the differences between them.

@@elpolaco7654 I might have all 3 in EXL. I'll have a look and see what I can do

@@elpolaco7654 I have 050 LGX and EXL in 058 and 063. Cutter sizes might be different but I can show the width across the tie straps

@@SawChainTheories The most important thing is that you have EXL 058 and 063. There, theoretically, you should see the biggest difference.

I'm a fan of Hexa because of the design of the file and how much easier it makes sharpening. I'm just not convinced the shape helps its cutting ability and at this stage I have been unable to prove it one way or the other. I think its slightly narrower kerf helps the cutting speed a lot more than the shape but could be wrong. Time will tell It's overall design makes it better for everyone that uses a full chisel and when I buy more 3/8 063 FC, it's what I will buy. I bought a few different semi chisels, Stihl RM, Husky S85 and Oregon DX so that's the next thing I will test. I'll see how they compare to their full chisel equivalent (RS,C85,EXL) and if we can speed them up a bit. Should be done in the next week or 2 if the weather plays ball.

It's dragging against the back of the depth gauge with no pressure on it, it's not hurting anything

Yes. Changed its side plate from the Hexa shape to that round file one in the pic. 25/60/60 in its original shape, 25/80/60 after I made it round. Was hoping to see some difference but it cuts and feels the same

@@SawChainTheories Thanks for confirming what seemed very likely, given how the cutting edges are shaped in both cases.

​@@elpolaco7654 I should have made it clearer. Both chains are real Hexa and I filed one round to see if the Hexa shape had any advantage. Completely changed it, cuts the same. I'm not really sure what that means or what to try next. I really expected something to happen

@@SawChainTheories That's what I thought from the beginning when I watched this video. I just wanted to make sure

I'm happy someone else found it interesting, I just happened to have a new one of each and was curious to see what, if anything, was different between them. I might do the same thing with 404 chain later on. I have a bigger range of brands in that size.

thanks@@SawChainTheories I'm quite happy plodding along using semi-chisel on my 291 doing some firewood but after your vid and looking up chamfer chisel, I might give it a go some time. Won't need new chains for some time though. Cheers d

@@davidfenton3910 Nothing wrong with running semi. You give up some initial cutting speed for the extra durability and I think most people will cut more wood in a day with semi chisel. I bought both these to try and test how long full chisel chains hold their cutting speed advantage for because a lot of them drop off very quickly. Hopefully I'll find out in the next few weeks

I didn't even think about the different side plate angles until I was doing the other video with the semi chisel chains and had that sudden realisation that I stuffed up. You are correct, the different shape lowers the corners position so the same file height makes a different side plate angle on a semi

Actually this makes me wonder about something else. How is Husqvarna giving us 30/60/60 angles for thier semi chisels chains? I bought one of their roller guides that is meant to suit both C83/85 and S83/85. I'll have to check if it's holding the file on an angle with the file handle raised slightly to achieve this or does it change the semi's side plate angle

@@SawChainTheories I think manufacturers give the angles that should be achieved with the sharpening method they recommend for users. That is, they are not necessarily the angles with which the cutters came out of the factory. I don't know why Husqvarna gives such angles for a semi chisel. You can probably check what they actually are after sharpening according to their recommendations (no down angle). But I wouldn't be surprised if these values were taken from thin air. That's why I was surprised by the changes in the angles given for Carlton chains in different manuals for the same chains and the same sharpening methods. Anyway, as we noted in the current Carlton catalog there are nonsense values given for side plate angles, e.g. for .325 full chisel.

@@elpolaco7654 I'll check later on with the roller guide for my own curiosity. I don't like their suggested angles but I'll at least give it a try. There is a good chance that I don't know what I'm doing and they have figured out something better

I bought the guide the other day and it says it suits C83/85 and S83/85. Short version, no it doesn't. It does a horrific job on S85. Top plate and side plate angles get changed to 75 degrees from the original 60. It's ok on the C85. I also have some S35G and the guide for that and it's not good either. I suspect it will work as the chain is filed back but definitely not when nee

I got bored while off work with bronchitis and somehow decided this might be fun. Its been entertaining I think I'm done for a week or 2 until I can get some video of running the saw to show how some of this stuff works. It's going to be easier to explain when I can show the end result On the other hand, I have a big tub full of all the different sharpening things I have bought, been given or found over the years. I'm tempted to tip it all out on the bench and make a video on what works and what's shit to help others avoid buying them

I still think it's for simplicity. The majority of people stuff it up anyway so it's just easier to say hold it flat. When some new to saws that asks me what to use, I just recommend semi chisel and a 2 in 1 guide. This is a little more advanced for when people are looking for every bit of chain performance they can find.

I'm not really sure. I went through heaps of carlton 404 semi over the years and it's extremely easy to make that 85-90 side plate on it due to the height and shape of the tooth. The file just sits in there at the right height. I have heard it's been discontinued as well and it's a shame. I loved the 404 semi and the 3/8 full chisel has a fantastic side plate profile for square filing. It has the thinnest top plate of all the chains I have used. We can still get some of the old stuff here but from what I can tell no more is being imported and possibly not manufactured. I miss the old Windsor chains and still have a bunch of the speed tip bars. The 1 in this video is a D009, 404, 063 speed tip.

@@SawChainTheories Now I think that someone preparing the document simply made a mistake and replaced 8 with 6. Of course, this value of 60-65 is duplicated many times in the document. On the other hand, at the moment Stihl tells you to get a side plate angle of 60° for RS in the USG chart. That is, according to Stihl, 60° is sufficient (and required)... At least they are consistent with this lack of recommendation to use the down angle.

@@elpolaco7654 In the latest carlton catalogue that I can find there is 325 chain that they recommend 60 side plate on. It looks identical to Oregon 20/21/22 LPX. I made an attempt to copy the Stihl RS grind the other day. On the Chinese Oregon grinder I have I had to come in at 50/30/10 and profile the wheel to match. The flat part of the wheel had to come down to about the bottom of the top plate to match the shape they put on there from the factory.

@@SawChainTheories Wait a minute. Are we talking about the same angle now? In the current catalog (2020) on their website, the .325 K1/2/3L(X) chains (others too) have a side plate angle of 85-90° listed. With that said, they don't recommend to use a down angle with them. Of course, the head tilt angle or the cutting angle has not changed for Carlton and remains 60°, unlike Oregon, where it is 55° generally. 50/30/10 and lowering the wheel this way sounds very reasonable. 50° agrees with Stihl's recommendation for the USG.

@@elpolaco7654 You are correct, just looked at it and I thought they had changed the recommendation for the LX. Looking at the pictures of it in the catalogue, there's no way that it has a 85-90 degree side plate like they are recommending.

Thanks. That's good advice that I did follow after doing this tooth, I stuck a plastic wedge under the bottom to pull more tension.

It's a single bevel version of a Vallorbe. It does pretty much the same job as the style you have, just a bit thinner overall. I don't have the exact one you have but this and the other Pferd file will create the same shapes. I forgot to take pics. Give me a bit and I'll email them to you. If you want me to show some more of how it's done or want anything else explained better let me know

45.6cc. It should not be able to run full size 3/8 chain but it does somehow. Literally the same size and power specs as a ms250

Crazy I don't how how you can get less time on filed round. I have tried many hexagonal profiles and they all beat all round filed profiles.

@@ChainsawUsers I have tried both usually the hexagonal profiles perform better but i have also hand filed round and was shocked

@@ChainsawUsers Honestly don't know. The whole video has 3 cuts with the new chain and 4 with the sharpened one. The average is even more in favour of the round filed chain.

It was a surprise to me! I was 100% confident that it would be slower and I used a saw with only 3hp that I thought would struggle with the bar completely buried in some hard wood. The hard nose is a little more tricky to get the chain tension just right but when you do it appears to make no difference to cutting speed. I'm considering getting a 25 inch hard nose bar for the 880 so I can see if adding more chain speed has an effect.

I made this video because I wanted to see how much was lost with the hard nose and thought using it on a small, low powered saw would get the biggest difference. It sure wasn't the outcome I was expecting either and goes against everything I had read or heard, but 2 cuts with each bar on one saw isn't a definite result. I will try to replicate it on a bigger saw if I get a hard nose and sprocket nose in the same size again. I think the advantage the hard nose has is from the larger diameter of the nose and more belly. It won't work as well for plunge cuts but appears to help with these cuts.

I always thought so as well. I used the same saw, same chain, same log and the cuts were maybe 5 minutes apart. I didn't sharpen it, just swamped the bar over. The sprocket nose bar isn't damaged, it's a GB Arbor Pro bar. Nose is in good condition. I don't know why it was different. I expect the hard nose to be a bit slower. It could be from the chain having less tension on the hard nose or the larger radius on the end. Could be a knot in the wood slowing one down. I don't really know. My experience with hard nose bars is limited to using them on much larger saws than this. I got this bar for a good price and just thought I would compare them to see the difference.

Are the bar lengths the same? The sprocket nose looks a couple inches longer?

@@tyleroconnor2113 I used the same 66DL chain on both bars. Length is the same