Cordless Chainsaw

[Kevin Walton]

Hi all

I know from a quick read that a lot of you are not keen on cordless chainsaws for a number of different reasons, but I have to say that in my experience I personally feel that they do fill a valuable gap between loppers and a Petrol / Electric chainsaw. It may be my fault, but I don't get on with a bow saw for anything bigger than say 2.5" diameter, the cordless chain saw would do 2.5" with ease and cope with

3.5".

I had a cheap brand cordless chainsaw from Argos this summer and it was great - it had limitations in branch size and battery life, but it became invaluable. Unfortunately last month it died on me and the two retailers that I know stocked them (Argos & B&Q) in the UK both say they are discontinued.

Does anyone know if they are still sold in the UK anywhere, or does anyone in the UK have one that is sitting around that they want to sell, or is anyone going on hols to the US and want to bring me one back for a profit? :)

[Franz Heymann]

fault,

Reciprocating electric saws are quite effective at dealing with limbs up to 2 or 3 inches diameter and are much safer than chain saws.

[snip]

Franz

[Mike Lyle]

cordless

that

limbs

Having had the full ATB training course on chain saws, I'm horrified by what I see. Poor maintenance (or none), insufficient protective gear (or none), clumsy technique (or none). I seriously think there should be a licence to drive one of those things. I agree on the reciprocating saw; but on the other hand, a bow saw with a brand new blade is good enough for _most_ gardeners: what does it matter if it takes five minutes to cut through a branch instead of thirty seconds? If one needs a rest and a cup of tea half-way, well, why not?

Mike..

[usenet]

I bought a cordless 'lopper' from B&Q recently which is actually a mini chainsaw. I wanted it for trimming bigg[ish] branches off trees up our (7 acre) garden where I can't get the mains powered chainsaw that I normally use.

I've been quite impressed with it in practice, it will cut through 4" or even 5" oak tree branches without too much trouble. It won't do this for long of course but I don't need it to. It cost £50. You can get extra batteries for it. The charger turns itself off after charging which is a good plus as well.

It's an 'own brand' B&Q.

[Alex (YMG)]

7 acres. You bastard :)

Alex

[Nick Maclaren]

Even for someone in fairly poor shape, 5 minutes with a bow saw is quite a branch! c. 9" diameter apple or c. 6" diameter hawthorn, I would reckon. Of course, I use a 30" bow saw with a blade in decent condition ....

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

[Mike Lyle]

seconds?

Sure: I'm just trying to put it in perspective. If one's got a lot to do, then a power tool may be the answer; but most people probably don't need petrol this, and electric that.

Mike.

[Richard]

It took me 2 days to reduce approx 12 Lawson Cypress that were possibly planted in 1953 from above almost ridge height of a two storey house to approx 10' in height. This included cutting the bits up to fit my trailer (8' x 4') and taking it to the tip (5 mile round trip). The trunks are approx 14" diameter at the thickest (not where I cut them!).

To do this I used a 20 or 22" bow saw with a new green wood blade. My bigger bow saw was too clumsy to be effective.

But I was knackered after all that and yes I really wish I had a chainsaw!

Richard

[Franz Heymann]

seconds?

The trouble with bow saws is that the bow always seems to get in the way.

Franz

[Kevin Walton]

[snip]

Thanks Chris, I assume your talking about this item:

although it is still on the website it is now discontinued by B&Q - I have spoken to 1/2 a dozen B&Q stores and head office :(

Cheers Kev

[Nick Maclaren]

That's quite impressive. However, if you include the time for setting up and maintaining a chainsaw, my suspicion is that it would have been SLOWER. After all, it CAN only reduce the cutting time, and not the other aspects. The same would not be true if you did that once a fortnight.

I agree that you would have got less tired, but think of how much you have improved your life expectancy :-)

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

[usenet]

They might still have some at Ipswich (there was certainly more than one there when I bough mine a week or two ago). The one on the web site looks exactly like mine but claims to have "automatic chain lubricant". Mine just has a little sqeezy bottle of oil that you squirt on it at intervals.

[Mike Lyle]

horrified

there

seconds?

Yes. Of course, one of those "triangular" frames will often let you in. Second, and this applies to chainsaws as well (in spades), inconvenient side branches need to be lopped away before one tackles the main job. This preliminary cleaning is as much for safety as for convenience; but it saves stress and effort, and quite often time too for the job as a whole.

What you do about the awkward situation which always seems to crop up, where you find there just isn't a comfortable working position, I don't think the wit of man will ever discover. Patience helps!

By the way, I did a nice little activity in the local school once. A slice of tree can photocopy very clearly, and after a few activities about trees in general, I issued a sheet to each child showing the rings of an ash I'd cut that morning: they then worked out the age of the tree, identified the sunny side and compass points, and marked the rings for significant dates such as their families' birth years. Good fun.

Mike.

[David Hill]

Nick Maclaren wrote ".......Even for someone in fairly poor shape, 5 minutes with a bow saw is quite a branch! c. 9" diameter apple or c. 6" diameter hawthorn, I would reckon. Of course, I use a 30" bow saw with a blade in decent condition .."

Two of us were able to cut through 9 inch oak branches, 1 of us at each end of the saw, in less than 20 seconds. If you use a 30inch bow saw with a Sandvik blade there is very little that you wont be able to cut easily. It's not worth the saving buying low cost blades.

[Ian Stirling]

An electric saw can be a bit quicker than petrol, as you don't need to do anything (until it gets blunt) much other than topping off the oil tank every now and then. No concerns about it starting, or ...

[Al Reynolds]

I've looked into this a bit, and you're right about Argos & B&Q discontinuing them. The Argos one was the Challenge Cordless Lopper

the B&Q one was the Perfomance Power Cordless Lopper both look similar to a Makita cordless pruner (also available from Dolmar) which has also been discontinued. two cheapies are clearly identical, and there are a few similarities with the Makita - check out the switch positions and the screw holes. I assume the build quality will be better on the Makita.

I am beginning to wonder why they have all been discontinued. The Makita ones sometimes come up on ebay. Take a look at

an auction for one of these finishing on Friday lunchtime.

HTH, Al

[Al Reynolds]

I also found this one:

like Power Devil branding but I can't tell from the pic.

Al

[Nick Maclaren]

In article , "Al Reynolds" writes: |> |> I am beginning to wonder why they have all been discontinued. The |> Makita ones sometimes come up on ebay. Take a look at |>

|> for an auction for one of these finishing on Friday lunchtime.

At a guess, safety regulations. It is possible (even likely) that the cordless ones escaped some regulations by an accident of wording, and the loophole has been closed. Bringing them up to regulations could well be too expensive, or make them unattractive to users.

I make no comment on whether such regulations are justified or not; both types are widespread.

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

[usenet]

I was lucky to buy one just a couple of weeks ago then, I'm very pleased with it so far. I'll drop in and buy a second battery soon just in case they stop stocking them (though the battery is common to a lot of tools).

The major difference is that the Makita is 12 volts and the B&Q is 18 volts, I don't know about the Argos one.

[usenet]

I can't see anything specifically more dangerous about the cordless chainsaws when compared with an 'ordinary' mains powered one or even a petrol engined one. The cordless loppers have the 'anti kickback' cover on the nose of the blade which is pretty stupid really, you'd have to be holding the thing with only one finger for it to be able to kick back to any significant extent. It just doesn't have the power to do anything serious if you're holding it firmly. Even my mains powered (rather old) B%D chainsaw doesn't really have the oomph to kick back seriously.

I suppose it *might* be that the cordless loppers don't require training for commercial use but the other ones do.

Anyone can buy any sort of chainsaw for their own use.