"J" wrote in message
...
"Andy Dingley" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:30:05 GMT, Lobby Dosser
wrote:
I see the top-handle as offering better control.
Then that's not a top-handle chainsaw.
All (?) chainsaws have a top handle. Most have a rear handle too. A
"top handle" saw _only_ has a top handle. You use it one-handed and
you don't have the rear handle to give you an extra couple to try and
control any kickback.
Here's where some confusion comes in. If you've never used a chainsaw, I
guess it's understandable. All chainsaws do not have a top handle.
Conventional design is for a rear handle and a left side handle. Your left
hand grabs the top of the handle, but it protrudes out of the left side and
gives control over the saw body. What they don't have is a top handle.
Top handle saws move the rear mounted right hand position up to the top
center of the saw - BUT, the left hand remains as in the case of the
conventional design. No chainsaw is designed to be used one handed.
Your right hand does not control kick back. Your left hand does. It's the
hand that exerts force downward. The right hand is not supposed to rock or
pivot against the tree dogs as a lot of people do. You certainly can do
that, but the saw is designed to cut straight down through a log. Pivoting
the saw is an indication of a dull chain or a novice user. Kick back occurs
one way and one way only. The very front of the bar has to come in contact
with something. The tip of it. Your left hand is what resists that
kickback should it occur. Pivoting the right hand can produce kickback if
the bar is burried in the tree, which is common with trees that are larger
in diameter than the saw bar. Pivot the bar past 90 degrees and you hit the
point where the tip of the bar is the contact point. Guaranteed kickback.
Not probably - guaranteed.
They're basically dangerous and uncontrollable.
This is patently untrue.
They're only
justifiable if you're working up a tree and need one hand for yourself
- more an arborist's tool than a lumberman's.
Equally untrue. That would be the worst time for an ill managed saw. But
then again, these are not a design that is inherantly ill managed.
If you get a kickback,
the saw _will_ jump up, because you simply can't control it in one
hand. Your only hope of vaguely safe working is to reliably always
know that when it jumps, you aren't where it's going to be heading.
This requires skill and practice.
This is pure bull. The saw is always going to kick back in a consistent
direction. Unless you're a contortionist and a very strong one at that,
you'll not be able to get the saw in a position so that kickback is not
going to bring that saw directly back to you. Skill and practice have
absolutely nothing to do with it. Nobody learns how to control kickback and
put it to some useful purpose. Kickback is something that is avoided at all
costs. The only safe way to use a chainsaw is such that you are always in
the direct path of kickback, so you make it a practice to avoid kickback.
My, that looks a bit dangerous. With the throttle at the point of balance
of
the saw the grip is really just a pivot point. Given the choice I think
I'd
rather be taking the limbs off by hand.
The right hand is always just a pivot in that you use it to keep the saw
level. The saw does not look to be any more dangerous than a conventional
design and in fact appears that it could be an advantageous design for some
applications.
--
-Mike-