Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
As of the last few years I have been using a Bucksaw more and more, no real reason except that I don't like the idea in general of relying so much on modern equipment that you are helpless without it. You can take this to any extreme you want of course but this is where I am now anyway. What has this to do with Busse Combat? Well the last few times I have been at the woodpile :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/woodpile.jpg
I took the Battle Mistress :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/bm_outside.jpg
and the Bucksaw :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/buck_saw.jpg
and used them back and forth to get an idea of the range of performance of each. On some light to medium scrap :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/scrap.jpg
The Battle Mistress takes less time and effort. On this size and type of wood it chops though cleanly with little time and fatigue. It can take longer to set the Bucksaw, than to chop though the scrap with the blade. As the wood starts to go over the 2x4" sized mark, the saw starts to catch up, and with an all out effort on both parts, does pull ahead. But not to the extent that I would actually go and get it, if I had the Battle Mistress on me at the time.
However the felled wood is different altogether, mainly because it is significantly larger. I would be comfortable using the Battle Mistress on wood of this size :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/small_wood.jpg
as it will go through without taking a lot of time or effort. The saw will still outcut it, but again, I could make due with the blade. As the size of the wood drops, the blade starts to catch up with the saw and eventually they are nearly identical as both go through small sticks in one hit or stroke.
As the wood gets larger :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/medium_wood.jpg
The saw starts to readily pull ahead. On the size of the wood in the picture, cutting up an entire log is a fairly decent piece of work for the blade, but not for the saw. This is at the point where I would go look for the saw unless it was an emergency situation.
There are lots of other issues of course, the saw is terrible at limbing, splitting and carving, difficult to use on felling bushy trees even when small, much more difficult to sharpen than the blade and much more difficult to carry (can get small portable ones though).
It was not as one sided a contest as I thought it might be and did once again drive home the point that it takes wood far larger than necessary for shelter building to really want something more powerful chopping wise than a decent knife. In regards to this it is important to note the wood had been seasoned for about a year, it was much harder to chop than fresh wood, on such the blade can handle much larger sticks with the same effort. It doesn't make nearly as much difference to the saw (you don't press down as hard as all, otherwise the blade will bind).
-Cliff
[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 11-16-2000).]
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/woodpile.jpg
I took the Battle Mistress :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/bm_outside.jpg
and the Bucksaw :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/buck_saw.jpg
and used them back and forth to get an idea of the range of performance of each. On some light to medium scrap :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/scrap.jpg
The Battle Mistress takes less time and effort. On this size and type of wood it chops though cleanly with little time and fatigue. It can take longer to set the Bucksaw, than to chop though the scrap with the blade. As the wood starts to go over the 2x4" sized mark, the saw starts to catch up, and with an all out effort on both parts, does pull ahead. But not to the extent that I would actually go and get it, if I had the Battle Mistress on me at the time.
However the felled wood is different altogether, mainly because it is significantly larger. I would be comfortable using the Battle Mistress on wood of this size :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/small_wood.jpg
as it will go through without taking a lot of time or effort. The saw will still outcut it, but again, I could make due with the blade. As the size of the wood drops, the blade starts to catch up with the saw and eventually they are nearly identical as both go through small sticks in one hit or stroke.
As the wood gets larger :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/medium_wood.jpg
The saw starts to readily pull ahead. On the size of the wood in the picture, cutting up an entire log is a fairly decent piece of work for the blade, but not for the saw. This is at the point where I would go look for the saw unless it was an emergency situation.
There are lots of other issues of course, the saw is terrible at limbing, splitting and carving, difficult to use on felling bushy trees even when small, much more difficult to sharpen than the blade and much more difficult to carry (can get small portable ones though).
It was not as one sided a contest as I thought it might be and did once again drive home the point that it takes wood far larger than necessary for shelter building to really want something more powerful chopping wise than a decent knife. In regards to this it is important to note the wood had been seasoned for about a year, it was much harder to chop than fresh wood, on such the blade can handle much larger sticks with the same effort. It doesn't make nearly as much difference to the saw (you don't press down as hard as all, otherwise the blade will bind).
-Cliff
[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 11-16-2000).]