Got Oak?

[sprawlnstall]

I’ve been eyeing this oak for a few years, it started dying several years ago. It looked dead last summer, weather is starting to cool off so it’s go time. I put a notch in it today and a few wedges. It is solid, had to put on the 24 inch bar to notch. I cut a similar one down two years ago and it is dry now. I’m curious what the moisture content is going to be. I’m guessing fairly high, dead or not a big oak like this is gonna take a while to dry. Will probably end up splitting the big stuff on site, a 16 inch round of this is heavy. Any guesses on how many cords this is?

 

[Ashful]

Depends on how much time you're willing to spend on branch wood. The trunk is easy, measure circumference, convert to radius (r = C/6.28), then cross section (A = pi*r^2), and divide by 144 in2/ft2, if you were working in inches. Then just multiply by feet, and divide that by an assumed 85 cubic feet per stacked cord.

I think loggers actually carry a tape measure that converts circumference to radius or diameter and cross section for them, to save on scratching a lot of math into the dirt at the wood lot, but the simple calculator on your phone is all that's really needed today.

I've had rare individual trees yield more than 3 cords from the trunk alone, but 1'ish cord trees are much more common.

 

[EatenByLimestone]

I like processing branches. Less splitting! Lol

 

[Ctwoodtick]

That was a beauty. Looks like most of its life it spent in the wide open.

 

[snojetter]

It is solid, had to put on the 24 inch bar to notch.

A 24" bar on that 2165? How's that pull buried in solid oak? Beauty of a saw no matter what!

 

[armanidog]

Watch out for metal in that trunk. It looks like old pasture land.

 

[sprawlnstall]

A 24" bar on that 2165? How's that pull buried in solid oak? Beauty of a saw no matter what!

The saw is a beast. I prefer it over my husqvarna XP pro saw. The jonserud sounds like a dirt bike when it starts ripping.

 

[Ashful]

The only spec's I could find (arboristsite) had the RPM on this saw at 12,500. If correct, 24" would be an awful long bar to swing in hardwood on 65cc, at that speed, no matter what the brand or color. Are you running a smaller sprocket to drop the RPM?

 

[sprawlnstall]

Not sure on the sprocket, but I suspect it is stock. It was rebuilt after the previous owner ran it using straight gas. It may not be as fast as a new pro saw but it seems to cut anything I’ve ever attempted to cut. I may be wrong but I thought I read somewhere that it originally came with a 20 inch bar but could run a 24 inch bar.

 

[Ashful]

Not sure on the sprocket, but I suspect it is stock. It was rebuilt after the previous owner ran it using straight gas. It may not be as fast as a new pro saw but it seems to cut anything I’ve ever attempted to cut. I may be wrong but I thought I read somewhere that it originally came with a 20 inch bar but could run a 24 inch bar.

You got me curious, so I did a little digging. My 036 PRO is 63cc, and typically was most often purchased with a 20" bar. But honestly, bury that bar nose-deep in red oak, and it will slow a bit.

I found I could make it work much nicer by putting big felling dogs on it, truly larger than anything such a small saw deserves, but it did the job of reducing the exposed bar length to 19". Now it doesn't bog when I bury it in a 36" diameter oak log.

The maximum bar length spec for a saw is usually based on the capacity of its automatic oiler, not the horsepower of the saw, as variation in wood species and chain type and size will dictate different power requirements the same bar length. Also, the fraction of RPM drop acceptable to one user, may really irritate another, expectations vary. Point in case, the aforementioned 036 PRO is rated to swing a 24" bar, but I'd never do that in hardwood.

Dropping the chain speed by running a smaller sprocket can make a big difference, since it takes less horsepower and torque to spin the chain slower thru a log. This is why your father got away with running 20" and 24" bars on some very wimpy saws 40 years ago, they had low-end grunt, but not much speed by today's standards.

Doing the math, the 63cc 036 PRO runs 13,500 RPM, and the 65cc Jonsered 2165 runs around 12,500. So, if I find 19" is the upper end of the 036 in oak, I'd guess the 2165 would be pretty comfortable up to 21 inches, in the same wood. If you only cut softwoods, or run a narrow chain or skip chain, then likely 24" is totally acceptable.

 

[sprawlnstall]

Interesting and informative explanation, I never considered RPMs effect on bar length. I’ve cut many cords with the 2165. It does seem to cut better when you place the felling dogs up tight against the log and slowly let it pull.

 

[snojetter]

What matters is how well she cuts for you, and I sense you are very happy with that saw. My "big" saw used to be a Stihl 029 wearing a 20" bar; when I needed that much bar, it just didn't have the power to pull it. (I also felt it lacked sufficient oil output.) A little over a year ago, I found a beat up Jonny 2165 that a good ol' boy from WI rebuilt with an OEM 50mm top end that effectively made it a 2171. It came with a 20" bar and the giant west coast bucking spikes, so it's really more like an 18" bar. Up to this point, I've used it primarily for noodling. What a great running powerhouse! Not long after I got that 2165, a 2166 came up for sale at a price I just couldn't pass up. This saw came with a 24" bar. It had no problem chewing through a blow-down ash and a standing dead elm, both of which required all of that long bar. I'm sure dry oak would give it a work-out - just need to find such a tree to give it the test.

The 2100 & 2200 series saws Husky put out in red and black are the best-looking saws ever made (in my humble opinion). Such a shame they put that name to rest. You don't see a lot of folks running Jonsered in MN, so I like seeing other folks out there making chips with these beauties!

 

[Grizzerbear]

I'm going to guess just shy of 3 cord in that tree.

 

[Caw]

an assumed 85 cubic feet per stacked cord.

Why 85 not 128 cu ft?

I'm guessing you're accounting for a tight vs loose stack but I always thought the 128 cut ft was supposed to be measured in a tight stack.

 

[Sawset]

I cut a large oak down last fall that looked similar. Ended up cutting it down was just the beginning. The trunk was held up by the side branches, and the remaining branches were like more medium size trees that needed to be felled all over again. Like cutting down trees while standing on another. Made 2-1/2 cord though.

 

[Ashful]

Why 85 not 128 cu ft?

I'm guessing you're accounting for a tight vs loose stack but I always thought the 128 cut ft was supposed to be measured in a tight stack.

Exactly. 128 cu.ft. is the volume of a cord of stacked wood, but unless it's one solid cube of wood, there's going to be air between those splits. Most assume the fraction of air to wood is smaller than the numbers we typically see published by actual authorities on the subject.

If you look at tables of cord weight posted by several US state's dept. of Weights and Measures, Engineering Toolbox, or several others, you'll notice that the cord weights run right around 2/3 (or 66.7%) of the solid wood weight, for a given MC%. I'm guessing someone way back in the history of US Weights and Measures, if not earlier in Europe, had done a study on the typical stacking density of cord wood.

The result is that you must scale by roughly 2/3, when figuring solid wood into a cord, hence roughly 85/128.

 

[Sawset]

I've had rare individual trees yield more than 3 cords from the trunk alone, but 1'ish cord trees are much more common.

We had a 100yr old silver maple taken down that produced about 5cord. That's without the trunk. The thing was 7ft dia., and they cut up the bottom 10ft and hauled it away in a dump truck. No one wanted to deal with 7ft dia rounds.

 

[Ashful]

We had a 100yr old silver maple taken down that produced about 5cord. That's without the trunk. The thing was 7ft dia., and they cut up the bottom 10ft and hauled it away in a dump truck. No one wanted to deal with 7ft dia rounds.

Yeah, I have three silver maples across the back of my property, and they get big, although mine are only 12' circumference (~4 ft dia). Huge weeds, garbage trees, a landscape architect in my family told me they only get "half credit" when I called them "maple trees".

The problem with the ones that grow around here is that, while being absolutely enormous, they're multi-trunked and vase-shaped. They tend to easily lose branches (and full trunks) due to high winds or any out-of-season snow. I wouldn't want one within dropping distance of my house, they do enough damage to the other smaller trees surrounding them, where they are now.

I would guess that on mine, the amount of big-diameter single trunk is maybe only 6 to 8 feet, before it branches out into multiple trunks. Some huge rounds, if I ever have to take one down, but thankfully not too many, since it's not very good wood.

 

[EatenByLimestone]

Carpenter ants love silver maples too.

I can’t be down on them though. They’re one of the ones I can get to season fully in a year., lol

 

[Riverbanks]

I have three of them on my property line, a messy tree, that's for sure. A lot of cleanup. On the plus side, the leaves break down quickly, my lawn likes them

 

[Caw]

They aren't ideal long term but have their purpose. They're good shoulder season/I need wood next year ASAP wood. I don't want to burn my 3 yard old oak when it's 40 degrees out and I'm just taking the edge off. I also burn stuff that in the evaporator every year.

 

[Kevin Weis]

For me it's the worst firewood out there bar none! Rather burn Altissama or Sycamore. Enough said.

 

[Caw]

We have worse stuff here. Poplar, Basswood, Butternut, Sumac, and Box Elder come to mind. I'd take Silver Maple over any of those. But here in MA I'm allowed to be a hardwood snob since I live in the middle of a deciduous forest lol. My racks for inside are exclusively red oak, red maple, ash, and cherry right now. The rest goes in the evaporator or fire pit.