On 01/05/2021 19:52, Andy Burns wrote:
> 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.
>
yes. That sounds about right. First of all this is maple. Its hard
stuff. More than that its been fallen all over winter and has dried
out. Finally 'having trouble' mean its slow...oh the chips are flying
out all right, but each cut takes a minute, not 5 seconds like smaller
stuff.

And can your cordless keep that up for two or three hours to section a
full sized tree?

I'll give the blade a sharpen and see if I can get near to finishing the
job today. Then it's on to easier stuff. 5m yews and Hornbeams that
haven't been lopped in 7 years...

--
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow witted
man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest
thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly
persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid
before him."

- Leo Tolstoy

On 02/05/2021 02:42, Paul wrote:
> 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
actually it is the original chain as the saw its brand new, but it
probably needs sharpening by now. So far its been brilliant, but really
the saw is too small for what I will be asking it to do. The blade
length is less than the trunk diameter...so the later cuts will be in
two goes, one from each side..

--
“Progress is precisely that which rules and regulations did not foresee,”

– Ludwig von Mises

On 01/05/2021 19:32, williamwright wrote:
> 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

no, its fairly close - leccy cars have about 200 miles range and petrol
ones 400 - 600.

But its oranges and apples, What counts is the total package, and an
electric power train weighs way less than a petrol or diesel one *if you
exclude the battery*.

Mains powered hedgetrimmers ought to be the lightest per unit power, of all.

But the actual stats that I looked up on a Stihl,. showed that the
battery equivalent to my baby Stihl was more expensive, of similar
power, slightly less weight but only half an hour cutting time.

Operationally as with a car what counts is the recharge time - seldom
less than an hour if you want the battery to last.

It takes me less than a minute to refill oil and petrol...

--
“Progress is precisely that which rules and regulations did not foresee,”

– Ludwig von Mises

On 30/04/2021 11:09, newshound wrote:

> Batteries are not cheap, and don't last forever (I have just skipped a
> perfectly functional B&D hedge trimmer and chainsaw because their
> obsolete batteries were dead).

A friend of mine has a high end (F****G expensive) set of battery garden
implements - lawn mower, hedge trimmer, brush cutter with a common
battery set. This was for garden business but cut short for health reasons.

It is chargers that have failed over the years!

I was surprised how good the lawnmower was BUT not so good as my cheap
petrol mower on longer wet grass. The brush cutter is heavy and really
cannot be operated without a strap over the shoulder to support the
weight. The large battery makes it top heavy and so the positioning of
the strap on the pole is important or else it makes you feel that you
have had a work out in a very short time.

The hedge cutter has a long blade and is relatively heavy. The advantage
is that on some of the hedge you can cut faster because there is no
worry about cutting the cable. I found that cutting the top of a 5 foot
high hedge was tiring because of the overall weight of the unit and the
position it had to be held. Cut three feet and then rest the trimmer on
top of the hedge to let my arms recover :)

The large battery did/does last 20 to 30 minutes and the hedge trimmer
has enough power to cut through fairly thick hedge branches. However I
would recommend when attempting to reduce the size of an older unkept
hedge secateurs and a folding wet wood saw are just as important.

The saws can sometimes be found in the German supermarkets for around
£3 to £5 and are surprisingly sharp and effective. Even my rusty saw
recently cut through a 2 inch tree branch with ease.

http://greenreview.blogspot.com/2018/04/aldi-gardenline-foldable-saw-product.html

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> And can your cordless keep that up for two or three hours to section a
> full sized tree?

I only nip down and do a couple of hours worth at a time to get rid of
the tree, the section of trunk was [guestimating] a few hundred kilos,
so levering it about to avoid the saw touching the ground takes a lot of
time, the saw's not running for long periods, but I'd expect it to need
maybe a set of batteries per hour if it was.

On 01/05/2021 19:52, Andy Burns wrote:
> 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.
>
14"-> 2 foot is *THREE TIMES* the amount of material to be removed...

I don't think people realise that the cross section area goes up as the
*square* of the diameter..and that times the kerf, is the volume you
have to rip to shreds to cut the tree.

And that times the wood hardness (willow is soft) is the amount of
energy it takes...

--
"I am inclined to tell the truth and dislike people who lie consistently.
This makes me unfit for the company of people of a Left persuasion, and
all women"

On 02/05/2021 08:57, alan_m wrote:
> On 30/04/2021 11:09, newshound wrote:
>
>> Batteries are not cheap, and don't last forever (I have just skipped a
>> perfectly functional B&D hedge trimmer and chainsaw because their
>> obsolete batteries were dead).
>
> A friend of mine has a high end (F****G expensive) set of battery garden
> implements - lawn mower, hedge trimmer, brush cutter with a common
> battery set. This was for garden business but cut short for health reasons.
>
> It is chargers that have failed over the years!
>
> I was surprised how good the lawnmower was BUT not so good as my cheap
> petrol mower on longer wet grass.  The brush cutter is heavy and really
> cannot be operated without a strap over the shoulder to support the
> weight. The large battery makes it top heavy and so the positioning of
> the strap on the pole is important or else it makes you feel that you
> have had a work out in a very short time.
>
> The hedge cutter has a long blade and is relatively heavy. The advantage
> is that on some of the hedge you can cut faster because there is no
> worry about cutting the cable. I found that cutting the top of a 5 foot
> high hedge was tiring because of the overall weight of the unit and the
> position it had to be held. Cut three feet and then rest the trimmer on
> top of the hedge to let my arms recover :)
>
> The large battery did/does last 20 to 30 minutes and the hedge trimmer
> has enough power to cut through fairly thick hedge branches. However I
> would recommend when attempting to reduce the size of an older unkept
> hedge secateurs and a folding wet wood saw  are just as important.
>
> The saws can sometimes be found in the German supermarkets for around £3
> to £5 and are surprisingly sharp and effective. Even my rusty saw
> recently cut through a 2 inch tree branch with ease.
>
> http://greenreview.blogspot.com/2018/04/aldi-gardenline-foldable-saw-product.html
>
>
To be honest if you had substituted 'petrol' for 'battery' in the above
hedgetrimmer and strimmer the report would have been identical.

In all case its operating with the weight above your waist that is the
tiring bit. The damned thing unbalances you. Hedgetrimmers with long bar
extensions are better until you need to use a saw or pruning
shears..then you need the step ladder, and operating up a step ladder in
uneven wet ground is not really nice.

One of the reasons I am going to take a lot of internal hedges right
down this year - I am not sire how many more years I want to be up step
ladders with a hedge trimmer...

--
"Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They
always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them"

Margaret Thatcher

"The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:s6llrs$3fs$1@dont-email.me...
>> 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
>
> no, its fairly close - leccy cars have about 200 miles range and petrol
> ones 400 - 600.

200 versus 400-600 is not "fairly close".

Not only do you have to recharge the battery more frequently, but every time
you have to wait many hours, as opposed to 5 mins max when filling up with
60 litres of diesel. We have often done journeys of more than 200 miles,
stopping only for brief loo breaks and maybe change of driver. If we had to
factor in a much longer recharging stop, a journey of a few hours would turn
into one with an overnight stop - or a long stop at a place of interest
along the way.

When cars have enough range to do a whole journey on one charging of the
battery, then they'll be a viable replacement. We'll probably never get
anywhere near the recharge rate of 60 litres of diesel (700 miles range) in
< 5 minutes, but then that is several MW of power. But if charging can be
confined to overnight when you're not travelling (or 9-5 when you're in the
office) then it's no great hassle. But having to charge during a journey is
a definite disincentive to owning an electric car.

In article <s6m0m8$64v$1@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:s6llrs$3fs$1@dont-email.me...
> >> 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
> >
> > no, its fairly close - leccy cars have about 200 miles range and petrol
> > ones 400 - 600.

> 200 versus 400-600 is not "fairly close".

> Not only do you have to recharge the battery more frequently, but every
> time you have to wait many hours, as opposed to 5 mins max when filling
> up with 60 litres of diesel. We have often done journeys of more than
> 200 miles, stopping only for brief loo breaks and maybe change of
> driver. If we had to factor in a much longer recharging stop, a journey
> of a few hours would turn into one with an overnight stop - or a long
> stop at a place of interest along the way.

That, too, is my concern. If life returns to 'normal', I expect to do 2 or
3 long distance journeys each year.

> When cars have enough range to do a whole journey on one charging of the
> battery, then they'll be a viable replacement. We'll probably never get
> anywhere near the recharge rate of 60 litres of diesel (700 miles range)
> in < 5 minutes, but then that is several MW of power. But if charging
> can be confined to overnight when you're not travelling (or 9-5 when
> you're in the office) then it's no great hassle. But having to charge
> during a journey is a definite disincentive to owning an electric car.

Longer advertised mileage ones appear to be coming, but they seem to mostly
"fashion statements" rather than useful vehicles.

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

On 02/05/2021 11:59, NY wrote:
> "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:s6llrs$3fs$1@dont-email.me...
>>> 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
>>
>> no, its fairly close - leccy cars have about 200 miles range and
>> petrol ones 400 - 600.
>
>
> 200 versus 400-600 is not "fairly close".
>
its the same order of magnitude

> Not only do you have to recharge the battery more frequently, but every
> time you have to wait many hours, as opposed to 5 mins max when filling
> up with 60 litres of diesel. We have often done journeys of more than
> 200 miles, stopping only for brief loo breaks and maybe change of
> driver. If we had to factor in a much longer recharging stop, a journey
> of a few hours would turn into one with an overnight stop - or a long
> stop at a place of interest along the way.
>
Oh I agree. Don't get me wrong.

My point was really that while electric cars *are* close, there is
certainly no cigar. Not even a hand rolled old Holborn.

> When cars have enough range to do a whole journey on one charging of the
> battery, then they'll be a viable replacement. We'll probably never get
> anywhere near the recharge rate of 60 litres of diesel (700 miles range)
> in < 5 minutes, but then that is several MW of power. But if charging
> can be confined to overnight when you're not travelling (or 9-5 when
> you're in the office) then it's no great hassle. But having to charge
> during a journey is a definite disincentive to owning an electric car.

Actually 5 minute recharges are *technically* possible. The trade-off is
shorter battery life, less efficiency and a heavier battery. This is one
area where development is actually making decent progress,

--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

On 02/05/2021 02:42, Paul wrote:
> 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.
>
I didn't.

http://vps.templar.co.uk/index.php?album=Garden

First picture taken at 11:12 am. Last picture at around 13:12 pm.

Two resharpens, four tanks of petrol, and almost 2 hours of continuous
cutting.

150 meters down the garden so forget mains power, and really unless I
had 4 batteries ready charged, more than I could do with a battery one.

Batteries may work for occasional hobby use, but some of us have MAN
SIZED TREES.

> 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 ?
>
Sharpening is te key. I need a new file now ...
>    Paul

--
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the
urge to rule it.”
– H. L. Mencken

On Sun, 02 May 2021 12:05:03 +0100, charles wrote:

> In article <s6m0m8$64v$1@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

>
>> Not only do you have to recharge the battery more frequently, but every
>> time you have to wait many hours, as opposed to 5 mins max when filling
>> up with 60 litres of diesel. We have often done journeys of more than
>> 200 miles, stopping only for brief loo breaks and maybe change of
>> driver. If we had to factor in a much longer recharging stop, a journey
>> of a few hours would turn into one with an overnight stop - or a long
>> stop at a place of interest along the way.
>
> That, too, is my concern. If life returns to 'normal', I expect to do 2
> or 3 long distance journeys each year.

Similar to me. Normally I can do a round trip of just under 600 miles
with a fill of diesel at start and finish of the round trip. With a
loaded trailer behind I can get to the 'return point' and then fill up
for the journey back.

Electric would see me stopping for top ups on each leg plus a proper
charge at the 'return point'. That is *solo* and in good weather without
lights etc.

With the trailer and load it becomes an unimaginable task with frequent
lengthy stops unless..
>
> Longer advertised mileage ones appear to be coming, but they seem to
> mostly "fashion statements" rather than useful vehicles.

.... the fashion statements do actually become usable vehicles especially
when towing a load.

I expect that I may wait for a few years more, buy a good diesel and let
that see me out.

Bev wrote:

> With the trailer and load it becomes an unimaginable task

Especially as only a select few electric cars are allowed to tow.

On Sun, 02 May 2021 15:21:32 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

> Bev wrote:
>
>> With the trailer and load it becomes an unimaginable task
>
> Especially as only a select few electric cars are allowed to tow.

Indeed - and most have a ridiculously low limit. Ok for a hobby trailer
to the tip but nothing more serious. Some hybrids have better
capabilities but still not as much as I'd like.

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:s6llrs$3fs$1@dont-email.me...
>>> 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
>>
>> no, its fairly close - leccy cars have about 200 miles range and petrol
>> ones 400 - 600.
>
>
> 200 versus 400-600 is not "fairly close".
>
> Not only do you have to recharge the battery more frequently, but every time
> you have to wait many hours, as opposed to 5 mins max when filling up with
> 60 litres of diesel.

You exaggerate as always. On a high power DC charger 30 mins or less may
be enough to take up you up to 80% charge. Ultimately the speed of
changing is determined by the potential output of the charge and the cars
capacity to utilise that output so there’s a fair variation. In general
though, things are improving. It is not always “many hours”.

Even if it is “many hours”, you can refuel at home while you sleep. Can you
do that with your car?

> We have often done journeys of more than 200 miles,
> stopping only for brief loo breaks and maybe change of driver. If we had to
> factor in a much longer recharging stop, a journey of a few hours would turn
> into one with an overnight stop - or a long stop at a place of interest
> along the way.
>

Undoubtably, for long fast journeys, conventional fuels win in terms of
convenience at the moment.

> When cars have enough range to do a whole journey on one charging of the
> battery, then they'll be a viable replacement. We'll probably never get
> anywhere near the recharge rate of 60 litres of diesel (700 miles range) in
> < 5 minutes, but then that is several MW of power.

No, but Tesla’s latest battery design could bring it down to 15 minutes and
that’s not *so* bad.

> But if charging can be
> confined to overnight when you're not travelling (or 9-5 when you're in the
> office) then it's no great hassle. But having to charge during a journey is
> a definite disincentive to owning an electric car.

Currently, I’d agree but when you can start off with a full “tank” every
morning you can often avoid having to charge during a journey. I’ve done
10,000 miles since September without ever having to charge during a
journey.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

"NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote in message
news:s6m0m8$64v$1@dont-email.me...
> "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:s6llrs$3fs$1@dont-email.me...
>>> 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
>>
>> no, its fairly close - leccy cars have about 200 miles range and petrol
>> ones 400 - 600.
>
>
> 200 versus 400-600 is not "fairly close".
>
> Not only do you have to recharge the battery more frequently, but every
> time you have to wait many hours, as opposed to 5 mins max when filling up
> with 60 litres of diesel. We have often done journeys of more than 200
> miles, stopping only for brief loo breaks and maybe change of driver. If
> we had to factor in a much longer recharging stop, a journey of a few
> hours would turn into one with an overnight stop - or a long stop at a
> place of interest along the way.
>
> When cars have enough range to do a whole journey on one charging of the
> battery, then they'll be a viable replacement. We'll probably never get
> anywhere near the recharge rate of 60 litres of diesel (700 miles range)
> in < 5 minutes, but then that is several MW of power. But if charging can
> be confined to overnight when you're not travelling (or 9-5 when you're in
> the office) then it's no great hassle. But having to charge during a
> journey is a definite disincentive to owning an electric car.

Yeah, that’s the reason I wont have one even if you cant buy a new ICE car
anymore.

Cant see a battery swap being viable either tho that would fix the charge
time problem.

"charles" <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote in message
news:592646499bcharles@candehope.me.uk...
> In article <s6m0m8$64v$1@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:s6llrs$3fs$1@dont-email.me...
>> >> 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
>> >
>> > no, its fairly close - leccy cars have about 200 miles range and petrol
>> > ones 400 - 600.
>
>
>> 200 versus 400-600 is not "fairly close".
>
>> Not only do you have to recharge the battery more frequently, but every
>> time you have to wait many hours, as opposed to 5 mins max when filling
>> up with 60 litres of diesel. We have often done journeys of more than
>> 200 miles, stopping only for brief loo breaks and maybe change of
>> driver. If we had to factor in a much longer recharging stop, a journey
>> of a few hours would turn into one with an overnight stop - or a long
>> stop at a place of interest along the way.
>
> That, too, is my concern. If life returns to 'normal', I expect to do 2 or
> 3 long distance journeys each year.

Me too, and mostly at night too.

>> When cars have enough range to do a whole journey on one charging of the
>> battery, then they'll be a viable replacement. We'll probably never get
>> anywhere near the recharge rate of 60 litres of diesel (700 miles range)
>> in < 5 minutes, but then that is several MW of power. But if charging
>> can be confined to overnight when you're not travelling (or 9-5 when
>> you're in the office) then it's no great hassle. But having to charge
>> during a journey is a definite disincentive to owning an electric car.

> Longer advertised mileage ones appear to be coming, but they seem
> to mostly "fashion statements" rather than useful vehicles.

Dunno about that last bit. That’s not really true of the longest range
Tesla,
but its got a stupid price.

On Mon, 3 May 2021 04:59:53 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile pest's latest trollshit unread>

--
JimK addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"I really feel the quality of your trolling has dropped in the last few
months..."
MID: <n8idndHg5972A2DDnZ2dnUU78e-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>

On 29/04/2021 22:10, Another John 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 Ł130 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
>

The decent cordless ones have quite heavy batteries - may not help you,
they are more convenient though with no extension lead.

On 02/05/2021 09:16, Andy Burns wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> And can your cordless keep that up for two or three hours to section a
>> full sized tree?
>
> I only nip down and do a couple of hours worth at a time to get rid of
> the tree, the section of trunk was [guestimating] a few hundred kilos,
> so levering it about to avoid the saw touching the ground takes a lot of
> time, the saw's not running for long periods, but I'd expect it to need
> maybe a set of batteries per hour if it was.

Same here. I don't see tree surgeons and full time wood-cutters giving
up on petrol for a while. But for more casual DIY use, especially if you
are getting on a bit and don't have to finish in a day, even an 18 volt
lithium is an eye-opener. And since I have standardised on one make, I
have three or four 4AH and two 2AH batteries; I suspect they'd be enough
for a full day even without recharging.

newshound wrote:

> I don't see tree surgeons and full time wood-cutters giving up on petrol
> for a while. But for more casual DIY use [...] 18 volt lithium is
> an eye-opener.

I'd say that's a fair summary.