Chris Green wrote:

> Are cordless *really* lighter?

Modern brushless motors can be considerably smaller and lighter, yes
there is the battery weight and it might be cheaper and lighter to buy
e.g two 3Ah batteries rather than a single 6Ah battery.

Tim Streater wrote:

> It's not pumping out 600W, that's how it's lighter.

My 36V brushcutter/strimmer puts out 1kW, but that is a 36V tool.

Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm cross--posting to DIY and to Gardening.
>
> I have had two Bosch AHS 55-26 (corded) hedgetrimmers in the last 10
> years. I cut a lot of hedging, in three different gardens, and this is a
> great cutter: 55cm blade, 600W power, and weighs 3.6kg; my second one
> cost me about ｣130 several years ago. Used sensibly, nothing stops it
> blazing through the many different hedges I look after.
>
> I'm starting to get older ... hang on: I've always been getting older:
> what has happened is that I'm starting to _feel_ older, and I'm
> wondering if a cordless (therefore lighter) trimmer will be kinder to my
> now-rapidly declining body.
>
> Does anyone have reasonably extensive experience of cordless trimmers? I
> can't really believe that even the best cordless trimmer could match the
> power of the one I have.
>
> Opinions would be most welcome - TIA
>
> John
>

If you’re feeling flush Stihl do cordless tools that can be used a socking
great battery backpack. This would make the tool lighter and possibly less
tiring to use but you’d have to factor in the 5.5kg battery on your back.

https://www.stihl.co.uk/STIHL-Products/Cordless-power-systems/AP-System-Large-Gardens-Professionals/AP-System-Batteries-Chargers/AR-backpack-batteries/274655-113662/AR-1000-Backpack-battery.aspx

Having said that, the lightest hedge trimmer they do that uses that battery
weighs 3.9 kg.

https://www.stihl.co.uk/STIHL-Products/Hedge-trimmers-and-long-reach-hedge-trimmers/Cordless-hedge-trimmers/274652-1549/HSA-94-T-Hedge-trimmer.aspx

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 29/04/2021 22:10, Another John wrote:

> Does anyone have reasonably extensive experience of cordless trimmers?

The only good cordless garden tools run on petrol.

Bill

On 29/04/2021 22:10, Another John wrote:
> I'm starting to get older ... hang on: I've always been getting older:
> what has happened is that I'm starting to_feel_ older, and I'm
> wondering if a cordless (therefore lighter) trimmer will be kinder to my
> now-rapidly declining body.

There's nothing more tiring than an underpowered garden tool. So
cordless are out.

Bill

On 30/04/2021 10:24, Theo wrote:
> In uk.d-i-y Harry Bloomfield, Esq. <a@harrym1byt.plus.com> wrote:
>> Here, that would involve around 4 or 5 recharges, so a 10 hour day
>> cutting, instead of the couple of hours work at present, we don't
>> really have that much hedge.
>
> Lidl were doing cordless branch cutters, which had a small and light 3-cell
> (10.8v) lithium ion battery. The battery life was about 10 minutes of
> runtime (bearing in mind each branch takes a few seconds, and most of the
> time is moving into position for the cut).
>
> Problem was, one job I wanted to do was off-grid, but a petrol cutter wasn't
> an option.
>
> So I bought four of them (£25 each). That means I got four batteries and
> four chargers. Enough for 40 mins of runtime. I had a car on-site that I
> could use to power an inverter.
>
> I could then charge batteries in relays - as one battery went flat I put it
> on the charger and picked up a freshly charged one. Although I never
> actually needed to do that in the end, and 1-2 batteries are enough for most
> domestic jobs.
>
> Theo
>
What a palaver

Bill

On 30/04/2021 14:17, williamwright wrote:
> On 29/04/2021 22:10, Another John wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have reasonably extensive experience of cordless trimmers?
>
> The only good cordless garden tools run on petrol.
>
> Bill

Have you actually tried a modern battery chainsaw, then? My Lidl one has
more than enough power for its 10 inch bar, as long as the chain is not
too blunt.

In article <if2eaeFoa07U2@mid.individual.net>,
williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
> On 29/04/2021 22:10, Another John wrote:

> > Does anyone have reasonably extensive experience of cordless trimmers?

> The only good cordless garden tools run on petrol.

> Bill

I have both petrol & battery ones,. Modern battery ones seem quite good for
simple lawn edging.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 30 Apr 2021 at 13:41:23 BST, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

> Tim Streater wrote:
>
>> It's not pumping out 600W, that's how it's lighter.
>
> My 36V brushcutter/strimmer puts out 1kW, but that is a 36V tool.

So it draws 28 amps? Must get toasty.

--
If socialism helps the poor, why are the poor in socialist countries so much
poorer than the poor in capitalist countries?

Mark

On 30/04/2021 14:15, Tim+ wrote:
> If you’re feeling flush Stihl do cordless tools that can be used a socking
> great battery backpack. This would make the tool lighter and possibly less
> tiring to use but you’d have to factor in the 5.5kg battery on your back.

I've used the brushcutter with the backpack battery and hardly noticed
the battery weight, the tool is then remarkably light so on footpath
maintenance I trim the path and sides with a 4 edge blade in it. It has
nowhere near as much power as a petrol strimmer but much lighter to use.
When volunteering we are only allowed 60 minutes trigger time and the
battery lasted two of us.

Many professionals are using cordless pole pruners and long reach hedge
cutters now. Similarly many climbers now use the small Stihl 160 and
carry up to 5 batteries to last the day. In overall performance this is
less faff then putting petrol in the saw, though of course you have to
top up with chain oil.

As with other tradesmen if the client has mains electric available
batteries are kept on charge during the day and I have yet to hear of
anyone being charged for the electricity.

On 30/04/2021 15:52, Tim Streater wrote:
> On 30 Apr 2021 at 13:41:23 BST, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>
>> Tim Streater wrote:
>>
>>> It's not pumping out 600W, that's how it's lighter.
>>
>> My 36V brushcutter/strimmer puts out 1kW, but that is a 36V tool.
>
> So it draws 28 amps? Must get toasty.

The batteries do get noticeably hot. Too hot for me to touch.
That is also true for a Dyson vacuum cleaner in continuous heavy use.

An AA cell can source over 10A into a dead short.
A D cell can probably manage nearer 100A. It will get hot!

It is probably one reason why their batteries don't last...

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Tim Streater wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> My 36V brushcutter/strimmer puts out 1kW
>
> So it draws 28 amps? Must get toasty.

I think the 18650's are rated for 20A continuous, 30A peak, and I
suspect it'll take most at the point of stalling.

OP here.

Thanks for a very useful discussion. I conclude that - horses for
courses - a cordless isn't the horse for my course [yet].

I do have a small (40cm) B&D cordless which is now about 5 years old.
With the enormous strides in battery and other electronic technologies,
I wondered if they now make a cordless which combines great power with
lighter weight. It seems that they don't.

Thanks a lot for all the opinions!

John

Postscript of dubious value:

My particular "course", as I said in the post, is that I do *a lot* of
hedges: I cut the hedges in three gardens (mine and two others); the
total length must be about 200 yards, counting two sides in a few cases;
the average height overall is over 6 feet. The hedges are [thinks]
cotoneaster, beech, hazel, [ivy], hawthorn, blackthorn, and the damned
holly (which must make up half the total: what a bastard that is to
trim, especially when you're half-way up a ladder).

Going up (and down) the ladder, is the worst thing, these days: joints
and legs.

All these hedges are very mature, and therefore have thicker branches to
cut at intervals, in different places. Hence, I chose a cutter which
has a wide tooth spacing - 26mm in this case. Even when the branch is
somewhat thicker (within reason), sawing at it with this trimmer will
deal with it.

As I said, it's a Bosch 55-26 - 55cm blade, 26mm tooth spacing. Also as
I said, it "blazes" through all this hedging. I only cut most of the
stuff once a year, but in my own garden I do some every growing month,
the rest just twice a year. (And always outside the nesting season of
course.)

From the discussion, my gut feeling was right: nothing compares to mains
power [coming into a powerful cutter].

Of course a 4-stroke petrol would be more powerful (and free of those
reels of cable), but my work nowhere near justifies that kind of cost.
Furthermore: even a 4-stroke is noisy, but a 2-stroke is absolute hell -
for the user, and for the neighbours. I have never considered using a
petrol cutter.

On 30/04/2021 14:54, newshound wrote:
> Have you actually tried a modern battery chainsaw, then?

Yes. A bag of shite when you're used to a good quality petrol machine.

Bill

On 01/05/2021 14:35, Another John wrote:
> With the enormous strides in battery and other electronic technologies,

What enormous strides? The energy/weight figure for battery is still
light years behind petrol.

Bill

On 01/05/2021 17:54, williamwright wrote:
> On 30/04/2021 14:54, newshound wrote:
>> Have you actually tried a modern battery chainsaw, then?
>
> Yes. A bag of shite when you're used to a good quality petrol machine.
>
> Bill
well yes.
My shoulders are aching from this afternoons efforts to chop up a 10
metre tall tree that fell over last year.
The thickest part of the trunk - that I have yet to tackle - is about 2'
diameter.

My little chainsaw - petrol - is having trouble with the 8" diameter
sections. I guess its around 1500W equivalent.

I was on for about a continuous hour today 1.5kwh.

The equivalent battery model is twice the price and has little more than
half an hour in the battery

and weighs only a little less.

--
It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
Mark Twain

On 01/05/2021 17:57, williamwright wrote:
> On 01/05/2021 14:35, Another John wrote:
>> With the enormous strides in battery and other electronic technologies,
>
> What enormous strides? The energy/weight figure for battery is still
> light years behind petrol.
>
> Bill
No, not light years, about 50%, For the whole package. A neodymium based
brushless motor is a lot lighter than an equivalent 2 stroke. But the
final weight is really all about battery capacity. That means a cordless
is a winner for occasional consumer use, but is fucking pointless if you
need to run the thing all day on a major bit of tree surgery

--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 01/05/2021 14:35, Another John wrote:
> I wondered if they now make a cordless which combines great power with
> lighter weight. It seems that they don't.
They do, but the price you pay is very short charge life. and its not a
lot lighter.

--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

In article <s6k4q2$cmc$1@dont-email.me>,
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>My little chainsaw - petrol - is having trouble with the 8" diameter
>sections. I guess its around 1500W equivalent.

A decent bowsaw would have no trouble at all with such diameters,
unless the wood is yew or hawthorn, when anything would. Yes, it
would take some time and effort.

Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

On 01/05/2021 14:35, Another John wrote:
> I have never considered using a
> petrol cutter.
given something like a total of 500 meters of hedge I never considered
using anything else....:-)

--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 01/05/2021 19:04, Nick Maclaren wrote:
> In article <s6k4q2$cmc$1@dont-email.me>,
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> My little chainsaw - petrol - is having trouble with the 8" diameter
>> sections. I guess its around 1500W equivalent.
>
> A decent bowsaw would have no trouble at all with such diameters,
> unless the wood is yew or hawthorn, when anything would. Yes, it
> would take some time and effort.
>
Oh sure. When the last chainsaw died I used the bowsaw on similar, this
is 5-10 times faster. And I am getting too old

Nothing specially tough about hawthorn, This is field maple. Tougher
than hawthorn IME. Last hawthorn I cut up the small Stihl waltzed through.

maple similar to oak and yew but cant find specs for hawthorn on line...
oh..they reckon 2x hard - well I didnt find it so

What I meant was that its taking a long time to cut the tree. Its purely
a function of power, but then a more powerful saw would weigh even more.

I can probably do about 100W bow sawing. Chainsaw does 1500W.

>
> Regards,
> Nick Maclaren.
>

--
There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do
that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon
emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent
renewable energy.

On 01/05/2021 19:04, Nick Maclaren wrote:
> In article <s6k4q2$cmc$1@dont-email.me>,
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> My little chainsaw - petrol - is having trouble with the 8" diameter
>> sections. I guess its around 1500W equivalent.
>
> A decent bowsaw would have no trouble at all with such diameters,
> unless the wood is yew or hawthorn, when anything would. Yes, it
> would take some time and effort.

Good grief! Not on your Nelly! If I want exercise I'll walk to the
fridge for another beer.

Bill

On 01/05/2021 19:00, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>> What enormous strides? The energy/weight figure for battery is still
>> light years behind petrol.
>>
>> Bill
> No, not light years, about 50%,

That doesn't equate with a vehicle's range with a tankful of petrol
compared to a battery full of leccy. And the battery weighs a lot more
than the petrol.

Bill

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> My little chainsaw - petrol - is having trouble with the 8" diameter
> sections. I guess its around 1500W equivalent.

My 36V chainsaw (with a nice new blade) happily slices 14" willow
trunks, it says it's 1100W max.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 01/05/2021 17:54, williamwright wrote:
>> On 30/04/2021 14:54, newshound wrote:
>>> Have you actually tried a modern battery chainsaw, then?
>>
>> Yes. A bag of shite when you're used to a good quality petrol machine.
>>
>> Bill
> well yes.
> My shoulders are aching from this afternoons efforts to chop up a 10
> metre tall tree that fell over last year.
> The thickest part of the trunk - that I have yet to tackle - is about 2'
> diameter.
>
> My little chainsaw - petrol - is having trouble with the 8" diameter
> sections. I guess its around 1500W equivalent.

Don't give up.

There are differences between the original chain, and
some third party replacements. I found my saw worked better
with the second chain on it. I would never have guessed
there would be a difference, as visually "a chain is a chain",
right ?

Paul