Sounded like you threw the chain right at the end. Great job felling the tree!!😀👍👍👍 I always enjoy watching you cut. Take care and work safe my friend!! Logger Al
Why no Humboldt undercut, perhaps tree are not going to sawmill for boards? Most saw mills, if not all, in the Sierra Nevadas in California up into Oregon and Washington want the log end cut flat, saw mills head rig would lose some on the notch. Jack, does it have something to in scaling board feet measurements?
Trying to decide right now between the new kid (592) and the legend (395). I'd be curious as to your thoughts for a double duty saw felling/bucking and occasional milling 42" and under. Seems like what I'm hearing is in stock form the 592 looks strong but once ported the 395 shows what it's made of... thoughts?
@@travisgilbert8416hi. An interesting thought. Dave has some miles on his 592. I would be curious to hear his thoughts. With any luck he will weigh in. I ran a prototype 592 against a 395 in a 3' cut. Fairly hard, inland wood. Both with just a few hours of run time. I tried .375 & .404 chain.The 592 was a little faster. The 395 weighed about a pound more. The 592 has a 55mm bore & 39mm stroke. It's "pre-designed" toward having good bottomend. But as you mentioned, the 395, at 56mm x 38mm, is a known quantity. There is a lot of nuance in the Husky designs that allow for someone that knows what they are doing to transform the new smog saws into firebreathers. The 592 does have a couple of flow limiters that I noticed, however. As a saw tuner, I've been able to have all the 5 series saws that I've done best the 3 series counterparts when all things are done properly. It's not the same for the Stihl saws. Back to the factory design nuance. But I digress... Part of it is going to be the timber size. The 592, being a pound lighter, will have an advantage when there is a lot of operator movements. For milling, Brutus Beefcakes type lowend is more desirable. The 395s have a proven track record. The 592s do not. The 592s have gone through extensive West Coast testing. Very minimal parts failure. No catastrophic, super nova machine explosions that I have heard of. This coming from the lead engineer. Like all things new, time will tell I guess.
@@hotsaws101 Really appreciate your response, Jack! As a tree guy I'm not having to haul a saw around the woods all day felling tree after tree like you timber fallers, so the extra pound won't affect me as much in that respect. I know the Auto Tune tech has come a long way and maybe I'm just old school but there's just something about being able to tune your own saw and work on it without needing a computer. Thanks again, Jack!
@@travisgilbert8416 I made a non M-tronic 661 to get away from the "lack of adjustability". Because like you, I'm also old skool. What comes out of a 592 is going to depend upon the tuner. There are a lot out there now. I saw where one pitted a 661 against a 395. Said they were both tuned equally. Somehow the 661 won. Not happening. In no way, shape, or form on this earth is that possible - if both where done the same anyway. I went on record, before Dave ever sent me his 500i. The premise was based on what had seen in the 462 as compared to the 461. In essence, I would be able to get more from 461 than 500i. Using all stock componentry, that is true. The Franken500i did run about the same as my "481". About, not exact. My gut reaction, based on the physical aspects of the prototype 592, is that the 395 will best one for the lowend grunt application. It may take more "involvement" on my part. There is no way to speak for others may, or may, achieve in that regard, however.
Saw sounds nice Mr. Dave, nice cuts, nice log, the wind picked up fierce there, nice job!
I love your Videos 👍.
But I don't want to file such a long chain by hand🙈🤣
Sounded like you threw the chain right at the end.
Great job felling the tree!!😀👍👍👍
I always enjoy watching you cut.
Take care and work safe my friend!!
Logger Al
Superb Dave-Another masterclass clip 👍
Nice saw!! Your the pro!!
Looks like it did good nice tree
Why no Humboldt undercut, perhaps tree are not going to sawmill for boards? Most saw mills, if not all, in the Sierra Nevadas in California up into Oregon and Washington want the log end cut flat, saw mills head rig would lose some on the notch. Jack, does it have something to in scaling board feet measurements?
I had wondered which "real" 36" you were using, lol.
They do pretty good pulling a 3 foot bar for stockers I must say.
Sounded like it hit nicely too.
Trying to decide right now between the new kid (592) and the legend (395). I'd be curious as to your thoughts for a double duty saw felling/bucking and occasional milling 42" and under. Seems like what I'm hearing is in stock form the 592 looks strong but once ported the 395 shows what it's made of... thoughts?
@@travisgilbert8416hi. An interesting thought. Dave has some miles on his 592. I would be curious to hear his thoughts. With any luck he will weigh in.
I ran a prototype 592 against a 395 in a 3' cut. Fairly hard, inland wood. Both with just a few hours of run time. I tried .375 & .404 chain.The 592 was a little faster.
The 395 weighed about a pound more.
The 592 has a 55mm bore & 39mm stroke. It's "pre-designed" toward having good bottomend. But as you mentioned, the 395, at 56mm x 38mm, is a known quantity.
There is a lot of nuance in the Husky designs that allow for someone that knows what they are doing to transform the new smog saws into firebreathers. The 592 does have a couple of flow limiters that I noticed, however.
As a saw tuner, I've been able to have all the 5 series saws that I've done best the 3 series counterparts when all things are done properly.
It's not the same for the Stihl saws. Back to the factory design nuance. But I digress...
Part of it is going to be the timber size. The 592, being a pound lighter, will have an advantage when there is a lot of operator movements. For milling, Brutus Beefcakes type lowend is more desirable.
The 395s have a proven track record. The 592s do not. The 592s have gone through extensive West Coast testing. Very minimal parts failure. No catastrophic, super nova machine explosions that I have heard of. This coming from the lead engineer.
Like all things new, time will tell I guess.
@@hotsaws101 Really appreciate your response, Jack! As a tree guy I'm not having to haul a saw around the woods all day felling tree after tree like you timber fallers, so the extra pound won't affect me as much in that respect. I know the Auto Tune tech has come a long way and maybe I'm just old school but there's just something about being able to tune your own saw and work on it without needing a computer. Thanks again, Jack!
@@travisgilbert8416 I made a non M-tronic 661 to get away from the "lack of adjustability". Because like you, I'm also old skool.
What comes out of a 592 is going to depend upon the tuner. There are a lot out there now. I saw where one pitted a 661 against a 395. Said they were both tuned equally. Somehow the 661 won. Not happening. In no way, shape, or form on this earth is that possible - if both where done the same anyway.
I went on record, before Dave ever sent me his 500i. The premise was based on what had seen in the 462 as compared to the 461. In essence, I would be able to get more from 461 than 500i. Using all stock componentry, that is true. The Franken500i did run about the same as my "481". About, not exact.
My gut reaction, based on the physical aspects of the prototype 592, is that the 395 will best one for the lowend grunt application. It may take more "involvement" on my part.
There is no way to speak for others may, or may, achieve in that regard, however.
@@hotsaws101 You make a very good point, Jack! Thanks!