sotc
Dormant hero!!
cool guys, cant wait for the second part
Big snow brings fun work
- Thread starter rbtree
- Start date
- Replies 74
- Views 9K
M
Muggs
Guest
What other examples do you guys have of needing a Hobbs/GRCS? At our tree service we use rigging as little as possible and when we do its usually 2 natural crotches (with a portawrap when necessary). We do everything old school, as much cut and chuck as possible. I guess that's why the boss can't justify spending that much on a Hobbs/GRCS. I'm willing to bet that a lot of good tree services don't have them. Do they really save enough time to be worth the price tag (other than for lifting trees off of houses)?
sotc
Dormant hero!!
brendan bought his a few months ago and said its paid for multiple times. think ive had mine a year and half, used the hobbs before that and i will buy a second grcs before a hobbs even though its 1000 more. you can beat it around in your head all day and wonder if you should buy it. after you buy it youll wish youhad much sooner. although it sounds like youllneed some rigging to
arborworks1
Treehouser
I priced grcs into a job last year and it has been a great tool for special occasions.
Tall skinny pine trees with a rigging tree next to it is my favorite.
If you add up all the gas you are using cutting and chucking I bet a grcs would pay for itself in a year.
More pictures of the snow and carnage
Tall skinny pine trees with a rigging tree next to it is my favorite.
If you add up all the gas you are using cutting and chucking I bet a grcs would pay for itself in a year.
More pictures of the snow and carnage
rbtree
Climbing Up
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 1,924
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #30
muggs. YES, yes, and YES!!
do a search....also at treebuzz...
go progressive, go advanced, you and all around you will be amazed when yiu start using modern techniques..which start with simple things like blocks, portawraps, mechanical advantage, split tails, and go on and up from there.
Old school works, but can be slow and inefficient...Tools like the GRCS and Hobbs allow work to be done that would be near impossible any other way...save for bringing in a crane.
do a search....also at treebuzz...
go progressive, go advanced, you and all around you will be amazed when yiu start using modern techniques..which start with simple things like blocks, portawraps, mechanical advantage, split tails, and go on and up from there.
Old school works, but can be slow and inefficient...Tools like the GRCS and Hobbs allow work to be done that would be near impossible any other way...save for bringing in a crane.
brendonv
Tree Hugger
I call it my crane in a box. I just can't see working without it now. Instead of cutting and tossing that branch multiple times, lift the sucker up in the air once. Enough hours saved, it's payed for itself.
Sure, what your doing now is working, I've done it in the past. But once you experience it there are endless possibilities.
It makes you look at tree's differently.
Sure, what your doing now is working, I've done it in the past. But once you experience it there are endless possibilities.
It makes you look at tree's differently.
M
Muggs
Guest
Don't get me wrong guys, we use modern stuff for everything else but rigging. We climb on VT's and only use spurs on takedowns, we use a porta-wrap when necessary, etc, etc. The truth is, our lead climber is ridiculously fast (he's only 20, been climbing for 6-7 years). On a takedown for example, he climbs each leader one by one, snipping off the branches as he goes (usually one-handing everything, which is relatively safe once you know what you're doing) and then flops the top out and blocks down the spar. Only uses rigging when absolutely necessary, but there's no way you can rig stuff out faster than he can climb. Myself, I prefer to one-hand less and I do try rigging a lot more than he does, but as far as the speed is concerned, I don't see rigging ever being faster than a very fast climber. I also don't see how you save money in gas by not doing the cut and chuck so much, because aren't you using the same amount of gas on the ground cutting up the big rigged piece as you are in the tree piecing it down?
I'm not dissing rigging by any means and I actually love rigging out sections of tree, I'm just saying that I don't see how you can justify a $2000 or more piece of equipment that I can't imagine you would need more than a half dozen times a year, that's all. I would actually love it if our tree service had one because it would be cool, but is it absolutely necessary?
I'm not dissing rigging by any means and I actually love rigging out sections of tree, I'm just saying that I don't see how you can justify a $2000 or more piece of equipment that I can't imagine you would need more than a half dozen times a year, that's all. I would actually love it if our tree service had one because it would be cool, but is it absolutely necessary?
brendonv
Tree Hugger
Who mentioned gas savings? That's kinda irrelevant in our profession isn't it? (just noticed arborworks did)
When your climber can go to the top of one lead and tie a rope, and lift it into the other lead, there's your time savings.
Necessary....nope! Necessary for Brendon....YEP, I won't ever work without one.
Oh---I only use the dump hoist in my dump truck once a day, it was probably 2k, should I shovel out the chips and wood instead?
This is like beating a dead horse, so I'm out!
I'm kinda glad not every tree service around here has one, just like my mini skid- I try to hide the thing on jobs so competition cant see it, I want them to get worn out from humping wood.
When your climber can go to the top of one lead and tie a rope, and lift it into the other lead, there's your time savings.
Necessary....nope! Necessary for Brendon....YEP, I won't ever work without one.
Oh---I only use the dump hoist in my dump truck once a day, it was probably 2k, should I shovel out the chips and wood instead?
This is like beating a dead horse, so I'm out!
I'm kinda glad not every tree service around here has one, just like my mini skid- I try to hide the thing on jobs so competition cant see it, I want them to get worn out from humping wood.
M
Muggs
Guest
Sorry guys, no I'm not looking for an argument. As I said, I would love if we had a GRCS.
Brendon, we also have a new Vermeer mini skid steer and a Hiab and they are the bees knees for moving large wood.
Brendon, we also have a new Vermeer mini skid steer and a Hiab and they are the bees knees for moving large wood.
arborworks1
Treehouser
I guess gas saving comes in the form of time savings as well. You use less gas aloft which equates to more time saved.
It is a mute point.
It is a mute point.
SkwerI
Treehouser
I understand where Muggs is coming from and I run into the same thing regularly. The plain fact is that I'm 4-5x faster with a chainsaw than 95% of the groundies I typically have to work with. It is way faster for me to cut it up from the tree than to set up rigging, make one cut and then sit and wait while the 3 Stooges on the ground attempt to deal with the big chunk of tree without cutting themselves or the rigging.
I know only a couple guys that are anywhere near as proficient with a saw as I am, but the few times we work together we're out of practice on rigging so I end up piecing everything out anyway. In over 98% of my work, getting the ground crew to rope down and cut up large sections would create huge delays and slow the job down immensely. But then if they knew how to rig and cut efficiently, they wouldn't need me.
I know only a couple guys that are anywhere near as proficient with a saw as I am, but the few times we work together we're out of practice on rigging so I end up piecing everything out anyway. In over 98% of my work, getting the ground crew to rope down and cut up large sections would create huge delays and slow the job down immensely. But then if they knew how to rig and cut efficiently, they wouldn't need me.
sotc
Dormant hero!!
arborworks1
Treehouser
I was thinking the same thing. :roll:
rbtree
Climbing Up
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 1,924
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #42
Relax, boys. We started late, hoping to miss the rain. It worked. It had just stopped when we arrived. Just after we got the 59 foot top off the house and down, and I stowed my cameras, it started drizzling. It took close to an hour to derig everything, and cut the 40 foot snag down (that I was in for filming, and directing everyone.)
Got home 40 min ago, started a fire, eating....downloaded the videos, haven't edited yet, or gone after the SLR pics. Mike got some video as well...
Gimme a coupla hours....
The 15-16" dbh hemlock was 125 feet tall, plus or minus 3 feet!!!!
Got home 40 min ago, started a fire, eating....downloaded the videos, haven't edited yet, or gone after the SLR pics. Mike got some video as well...
Gimme a coupla hours....
The 15-16" dbh hemlock was 125 feet tall, plus or minus 3 feet!!!!
B
Banned by Squirrels
Guest
Nice work.
rbtree
Climbing Up
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 1,924
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #45
Nice, Mike.....the D90, right?!
I just brought my wet climb gear in, and loosely coiled 7 ropes, hung them all by the woodstove. All told, about 1500 feet of rope....
Now to download the few photos, and edit the video.
and get ready for bed as the mt snow is back, and the upper chair at Alpental opened today, so I'm off to ski manana.
I just brought my wet climb gear in, and loosely coiled 7 ropes, hung them all by the woodstove. All told, about 1500 feet of rope....
Now to download the few photos, and edit the video.
and get ready for bed as the mt snow is back, and the upper chair at Alpental opened today, so I'm off to ski manana.
Oxman
Treehouser
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2006
- Messages
- 33
J
JohnB
Guest
Looks like the top just missed the sky lights. How did the roof look when you got the top off?
rbtree
Climbing Up
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 1,924
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #48
OK, so, as I said we'd do, Mike climbed the hemlock and set a block. I'd thrown a line in at 60 feet, from the roof, and Mike set the block, through a retrievable. But I felt it wasn't high enough to give us a good line angle, so asked Mike to climb up and set the rigging higher, which he did.
Meanwhile, I'd been on the roof, removing much of the branches, and making sure there were no stubs under the trunk. Threw them off, and tossed a second line to the ground, opposite the side we'd be lifting.
Eric and Mike moved the GRCS to the live hemlock, and I cut in the hobbs to the snag. Then I climbed the snag, shot pics and filmed, while directing Andy and the homeowner to hold tension on the back lines while Eric cranked the butt up, and Mike the tip. She came off easy and smooth as could be.
Granted it was a small top, but it was 59 feet long....and we'd cut off 27 feet or so that overhung the deck. The snag was 40 feet, so the tree was ~125 feet tall.....and maybe 16-17" dbh. That's one spindly tree!
They grow tall at Lake Tuck!! Some firs are approaching 180 feet!! Few are over 28" dbh.....
We'd not started till nearly 12:30, as we hoped the drizzle would let up. Mike drove the wrong road, got stuck in the deep slush, so Bill, the homeowner, had to go pull him out. Just as I put the cameras away, and cut a few sections out of the snag, it commenced to rain. It took us a fair bit of time to derig the trees, and put the gear away. Got done as it was getting dark....
We'll go back when the snow is gone to clean up the brush, and probably remove another hemlock, which is right next to the failed tree.
Meanwhile, I'd been on the roof, removing much of the branches, and making sure there were no stubs under the trunk. Threw them off, and tossed a second line to the ground, opposite the side we'd be lifting.
Eric and Mike moved the GRCS to the live hemlock, and I cut in the hobbs to the snag. Then I climbed the snag, shot pics and filmed, while directing Andy and the homeowner to hold tension on the back lines while Eric cranked the butt up, and Mike the tip. She came off easy and smooth as could be.
Granted it was a small top, but it was 59 feet long....and we'd cut off 27 feet or so that overhung the deck. The snag was 40 feet, so the tree was ~125 feet tall.....and maybe 16-17" dbh. That's one spindly tree!
They grow tall at Lake Tuck!! Some firs are approaching 180 feet!! Few are over 28" dbh.....
We'd not started till nearly 12:30, as we hoped the drizzle would let up. Mike drove the wrong road, got stuck in the deep slush, so Bill, the homeowner, had to go pull him out. Just as I put the cameras away, and cut a few sections out of the snag, it commenced to rain. It took us a fair bit of time to derig the trees, and put the gear away. Got done as it was getting dark....
We'll go back when the snow is gone to clean up the brush, and probably remove another hemlock, which is right next to the failed tree.
rbtree
Climbing Up
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 1,924
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #49
With the snow still there, I don't know for sure. But all I saw was one ripped roofing shingle....Bill said there was no evidence of any damage from inside the attic.
The way the tree had split, barber chair like, it may have been bent well over before it gave way...and the snow would have taken much of the blow. I'd estimate the entire top weighed 2500 pounds. It likely landed fairly flat.
Paul B
I dig hammocks.
Really cool Roger, Mike and crew.
