CurSedVoyce
California Hillbilly
You seem capable August
Like what I have seen thus far.
Tree felling vids
- Thread starter Reddog
- Start date
- Replies 9K
- Views 859K
You seem capable August
Like what I have seen thus far.
rbtree
Climbing Up
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 1,924
Next time Rog, remind him to use the humbolt
$$$
Bix, notice that we used a nearly 90 degree open face, which would have been difficult to achieve with a humboldt, and would have resulted in a higher backcut, so no net gain in board feet.
Due to the consequences of missing the lay, we took a good hour setting up the cuts. Even used two 6 foot poles as gunning sticks to confirm the aim. Even then, I thought we had it set up to land a foot closer to the shed than the fence. I set a cone out where we hoped it would land and was off by no more than two feet, in both directions.
squisher
THE CALM ONE!!!!
On flat ground a traditional face nets more than a humboldt.
Thanks for sharing those vids Roger.
Thanks for sharing those vids Roger.
Im not sure how a Humboldt would have helped there, but what do you mean by "nets more?"
squisher
THE CALM ONE!!!!
Volume, cubic meters, board feet. More log.
August Hunicke
TreeHouser
Speaking of cone. . .
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/_9t3AHq4S1c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
CurSedVoyce
California Hillbilly
MasterBlaster
Administrator Emeritus
Hahahahahaaa!!!
Limbrat
TreeHouser
Bullseye!
NHlocal
TreeHouser
Ayuh..... 
pantheraba
More biners!!!
Smushed!!! You guys have WAY too much fun! 
SouthSoundTree
Treehouser
Is that from a lower stump?
SouthSoundTree
Treehouser
Do you not have to square the butt by cutting that off?
The butt should already be square from the humboldt.
But for the sake of discussion, doesn't cutting a humboldt frequently result in a stump which is a tad higher than the stump height resulting from a conventional cut, thus, no net difference in wood saved?
Or, if you argue that generally you can get the same stump height from either a humboldt or a conventional, then one can argue cutting a humboldt is more work/time spent cuz you are fighting the stump flare. That may be worthwhile when logging valuable trees vs just getting a tree down on a tree job.
But for the sake of discussion, doesn't cutting a humboldt frequently result in a stump which is a tad higher than the stump height resulting from a conventional cut, thus, no net difference in wood saved?
Or, if you argue that generally you can get the same stump height from either a humboldt or a conventional, then one can argue cutting a humboldt is more work/time spent cuz you are fighting the stump flare. That may be worthwhile when logging valuable trees vs just getting a tree down on a tree job.
gf beranek
Old Schooler
I did the same thing on a bet and lost because of a technicality. The stub of the tree I fell was forked at the top, and both forks straddled the target I was supposed to hit. To boot, the stub had a side lean I had to correct for. Now, I figured I was right on target with the fall, but not the guy betting against me. He said, "You bet you could hit it!" Damn the technicalities anyway.
woodworkingboy
TreeHouser
Seems pretty cheap of the other guy, Jerry, more like he should have doubled your winnings. It's like Robin Hood splitting his pervious arrow in the bullseye, and someone saying that technically he didn't hit the center.
gf beranek
Old Schooler
It was a six-pack bet. No big deal, but the guy did Welch, I felt.
CurSedVoyce
California Hillbilly
Used to bet a 6 pack for hitting scabbards and sticks. Won a few.. lost a few... I should play like that some more with a cone
MasterBlaster
Administrator Emeritus
We used ball caps...
August Hunicke
TreeHouser
Pretty mean to the hat.
August Hunicke
TreeHouser
I won the dollar but he did challenge me to hit my own cone so, I guess I was had. He probably had a side bet that he could get me to destroy my own cone with a smile. : )
