Anyone here have a circular sawmill?

I was reading some material on circular sawmills such as the timberking/belsaw M-14 and later M-16. Also looked at some photos from an older Ireland mill made in new york.

One guys mentioned that he wanted to cut lumber like the olde timers did but could not push himself to getting a pit saw. So the compromise was a circular sawmill with a 46 inch blade.

After looking at these, I have to say I like th simple design. You can even hook up your tractor's PTO to drive this thing or install an automobile engine.

But they also said these mills cut massively faster than a bandmill and most blades have some form of insert tooth called an IP. Bandmills have to have the blade resharpened every two hours in the log. The circulars have to have a bit filing done on 36 teeth about the same time. The new carbide tooth design on some circular blades can also motor themselves through most types of nails.

And it seems pretty cool to run this thing. Carriages going back and forth and setworks being racheted and headblocks moving in and out. And for portability, lets get real. Most sawyers want to charge about an hours or so just to move the mill and set it up. Then, many do not have hydraulics which helps in getting the logs into the mill. Tractors with fork bars work wonders here.

Often, most folks would rather schelp the logs to the saw than hire the saw to setup on their property if you do this quite a bit and the logs owners have to pay for the setup. I really dont have time to cruise the neighborhood with a band mill looking for work. So I would prefer them to bring me the logs. So I am not sure how valuable it is to being able to move this thing quickly.

So are there any of you out there with a circular sawmill? What have been your experiences with these things? Any ideas of where to find hunnkin cicular saw blades on the cheap?

The sawyer I get lumber from has a circular saw mill. Heres a link to his web site you can e-mail him I'm sure Steve would glad to answer your questions. http://www.hickoryandoak.com/lumber.htm

Oh boy how am I going to answer this. Dev, I owned a circle mill for several years. I like to purchase "old" machines and "rebuild" and thats what I done on my cirlce mill that I had. It was an O1 frick mill which was the largest mill they produced = (parts are more$). I had been having lumber for my woodworkinh hobby sawed by a local man who was 80 years old at the time and probably the most influential man in my life. I was 19 years old and decided I wanted my own mill. Being "conservative" I bought and old mill. It had to be TOTALY rebuilt. I would not trade the experience for nothing. I really enjoyed sawing on this mill. After three or so years during which time I found the love of my life along came kids. Now my mill was located on an old farm and I usally was there by myself with no around for several miles. Now don't think I'm henpecked as my wife never said a word about the mill, but I still remember the look on here face when I first unloaded the blade to it, all 60". I could tell every time I went to the mill she was scared so to make a long story short I sold it with the intentions of getting another one after the kids got raised. Well I went about a year and couldn't stand not having a mill, so I looked at several band mills on the market. Then I built my own. That was over 10 years ago. I have sawed thousands of feet of lumber with my band mill and will try to explain the differences. Band blades do have to be sharpened but depending on what type of band and what you are cutting(hardwood or softwood, clean or dirty) you can get up to 8-10 hours befor e they need it. Initial cost of bands are 15-45 dollars each depending on brand and type. Resharpening is usally $7 each. Compare that to a circle blade which will cos t $1500 or more. The circle blades do have insert teeth and there are several types of these. They too have to be sharpened but usally not as often and they can be sharpended on the saw. In terms of sawing speed the cirlcle mill will outproduce a band mill hands down. The portability factor really only comes in to play if you are cutting for other people.. In short I am happy with my bandmill and will keep it. But I still miss my circle mill too. :( There is something about hearing that big circle blade openening up a log:D :D that the band mill can't compare to. If you have any more questions about the different mills just ask and I will try to answer if not I can put you with some people who can.

I will chip in my .02, with my opinion (fully biased towards my experience) on a cirrcular saw mill vs. a band mill. While growing up, two of my uncles purchased and built two saw mills on their farm. The first was a Belsaw with a 46" blade powered by a flat belt off a Ford 5000 tractor. This mill was as you described, fast and fun. They took logs from the local farmers and property owners to saw. At first they did it for nothing while "learning" then they moved on to doing it for money. Soon they found that the belsaw was too small and purchased a larger mill. I do not remember the manufacturer, but this mill had a 60" blade. They also purchased a 1940's vintage Massey Furgeson tractor to power this beast. Now the milling was fun. I was too young to remember much of the particulars, but I do know that this blade had removeable teeth whereas the belsaw did not. I have seen both types of mills operate (band and cirrcular) and would prefer to have the cirrcular mill myself.

In fact, over thanksgiving weekend I went back to the old farm and about 1/2 way up the holler, overgrown in weeds, both mills still sit there rusting away with the old Massey tractor. If only I had the resources....

I've worked on a couple of circular mills years ago and the big disadvantage to the circular blade is the kerf width, much wider than a band blade. The circular blade has a slight dish to it and the inserts have to be wide enough to create a kerf that will clear the dish in the blade. The dish is there so that as the blade heats up the expansion will make the blade bigger (diameter) or smaller, without the dish the blade tends to become wavy with heat expansion. The old timers put the dish in by hammering by hand, its not much but has to be there for the blade to cut correctly.

But I have to agree they have a really nice sound to them.

Ray

James...
I came across a reference to a OO Frick mill and have seen some of the frick head boards mounted into a setworks. Frick seems pretty cool. You mention a 01 Frick. Whats up with these Frick numbers?

Did your Frick have wooden main beams? Did it have mini rail road rails attached to these bars?

Dan....
If I may ask, who currently owns these two rusting mills?

Dev, Frick made 3 different mills years ago there was the single O which was the smallest, the OO was a mid size mill and the O1 was the biggest. The main difference in the mills was the "husk" which is the part that holds the forward and reverse belts that move the carriage and the shaft that the blade attaches to. As the mills got bigger so did the shafts and other piecs. I beleive the carriage on the O1 was also bigger. Yes mine had a small rail like a railroad track that the carriage run on. When I bought mine it was all wood, but as I said I had to completley rebuild it, and I built my frame out of steel. Rebuilding one of these wase a major learning experience and if I knew then what I know now I should have walked away but I rebuilt it and cut a lot of lumber on it during the time I had it. I sold it to a man a few miles away and he ran it for years and sold it to another local who has not set it up yet. They do waste a lot more than a band mill by the kerf of the blade but depends on your needs. You mentioned a Belsaw mill. I looked at these and know where there are several clost ot me. These mills were designed to be "farm mills" and are very light duty. they cannot compare to a Frick or American or similar production type mill. Thats not to say they won't cut very fine lumber because they will. If youhave the chance to buy one at a good price give it a go.

Now to reply to Rays post. Yes a circle blade does waste more than a band but it will also cut at a lot higher rate of speed, so it depends on what your needs are. The dish you speak of in the blade is there for a reason. You mention that the wide kerf is because of the dish in the blade, that is not correct. A blade is "hammered to a set amount of dish depending on the rpm that it will be running and the gauge(thickness) of the saw. If you take a bare saw "plate" which is a sawmill blade without the insert teeth it will have a significant amount of dish. The insert teeth are held in by pieces called rings/ips. You use a special wrench to turn these rings and teeth into a blade. As youput these in it actually streches the outer rim of the saw blade and will take some of the "dish" out. After all of the teeth and rings are in there will still be some dish to the blade. When the saw is running at its "hammered" speed centrifical force will cause it to "stand up" straight. If a saw is not run at the correct speed while cutting or if its not adjusted with enough "lead" them the piece of wood being cut will rub the blade and it will get hot and if continued to long will ruin the blade or at least need rehammered. I should say that hammering a blade properly is more of an art and not something your backyard sayer can do PROPERLY. Now a little more on the teeth in the blade. Now you can get carbide tipped that dosent need much attention. But the type I ran were steel. To sharpen them you had to file them straight across the face then you took a punch called a swage and placed it over the tooth and hit it with a hammer. It pushed the corners of the tooth out to give the blade set. I can recommend a book that covers circle mill alignment and blade maintainence that anyone with a mill should have. I am at work right now and will need to get back on the book but I'm sure its written by a man named Lunstrom. It should be available from the USDA office. It is considered the circle millers bible. Sorry for the long post but some of this is hard to explain in writing but rather simple if you could see it.

Dev, one more thing. Not exactly sure when Frick went out of business but they are getting harder to get parts for the old ones. Be careful if you go this route. I can give you some pointers on what to watch for if you do. I know from your posts here that you like to restore too but sometimes it's better to walk away. If you find a mill please talk to me or someone that knows about them firsthand. Not second guessing your abilty just trying to save yousome headaches. Also if you look at Meadows brand of sawmills they are almost a copy of the older Fricks but I don't think parts will interchange.

Dev, sent you a PM on the book.

James....

I first came across the name Frick in the wirdest way. Some dude on ebay is selling a scale model of a Frick 00 mill. Its 96 in long and has a 10 inch sawblade. Most likely something from the olde unisaw.;) Its really cool but I cannot believe the current bid price!

I then setout doing more research. First, the moniker OO could have been a reference to scale railroad modeling. And the name Frick did not ring a bell. It does now. The first thing I noticed between say a belsaw mill and the frick mill was the more detailed and elaborate headboards. The frick headboards seem to have it more together.

Then I snaged some form of PDF document from the forrest service regarding these mills and there use and setup. In it, I saw some pretty good pictures of what a headboard looks like and how it moves.

I also have one of the latest sales brochures on the belsaw/timberking M16. Here, I noticed that the rails were made from 6 inch channel iron. There are no railway rails nor any other type of cinched guide rail. There is nothing. So I can conclude that the M16 is using two sets of rollers now. One set of rollers rides the top of the channel iron. A second set up rollers may ride the inside edge of the channel iron with a purpose of keeping the carriage on the rails. Personally, I kinda prefer the old railway rail version as it looks cooler.

Another thing I noticed about the Frick model was that it may have a belt driven offloading table. THis may be nice to have.

But there is another thing to consider. I personally like to see wood and metal combined. For example, the conover lathe was one of the coolest modern lathes made. And everyone comments on how pretty it was. This one had the wooden bed rails. I know that a sawmill is not the best example to combine wood and metal, but I think the wooden rails look pretty cool. Now if you go with wood, then you may need to build a long and skinny shed or roof to protect this thing from the elements. And in the final analysis, this sawmill is more of a toy than anything else albeit a toy that can make some extra cash. You dont get rich sawing wood but there always seems to be a light demand for this type of work. And for the time being, I can hook my old allis tractor up to this thing until I can find some other power plant.

As for parts. So far, I have not seen to many parts that tax my skills. In fact, the thought has crossed my mind to just build the whole mill. This way, I get exactly what I am looking for. Of course an old mill with rotten timbers is also called a bag of parts or a sawmill kit.:rolleyes:

Its all food for thought. It also explains the old homestead buildings in my immediate neighborhood. In an old barn, I remember a huge rusty saw blade hanging on the wall in the machine bench room. Most likely, its a late 1930s belsaw now that I think about it. Frank had an old 2 cylinder John Deere tractor to run this stuff.

James...
Did the Frick you rebuilt have twin rails on the husk beams or just one. I think some of the older mills had a rail on one side and an inverted section of angle iron on the other. A V shaped set of wheels rode in this inverted angle iron which improved accuracy. It appears that this may have been used by curtis. So now I am curious as to whether other makers were using s similar system.

Thanks.

Dev,
You might want to spend some time here...

http://www.forestryforum.com/

Good people, tons of knowledge.

Ed

Dev, First the "husk" is the part of the mill that looks like a box that holds the saw arbor and the feed and reverse belts. It is not the track that the carriage runs on. On the Frick I had and any other one I was around the track that the carriage runs on has a round rail on one side and a flat rail on the other side. the mill I had when I built the track I used cold rold steel for the "guide" rail, I beleive it was 1" or 1 1/4". It was on the side against the saw. On the "back" side of the mill I used the top of the H-beam that was used to build track. On wood track mill there would be a flat metal bar attached to the back rail with countersunk bolts. The wheels on the carriage of my mill where flat on the back and on the front side that ran on the guide rail they were grooved to match a round rail. I have seen some mills (mostly band) use and inverted angle as a guide rail. Both type work ok. By only having one guide rail it saves on mill alignment. The guide rail has to be straight, especially on the circle mill types to get a true cut, not so critical on a band mill. The carriage was guided by one rail and allowed to "float on the other. It would be very hard to align two guide rails to stay in alignment, especially on wood frame mills where expansion and contraction are more evident. I am thinking the belsaw mills used the inverted angle but it's been a while I could be wrong. when I was looking for a mill I bought a belsaw mill manual and loooked at a few and was about to build my own when I found the Frick. Then hardest part to build will be the carriage that carries the log. The rest of the mill would be simple to build. If you are interested in a mill I would suggest you find someone in your area that has one and go watch for a while. the belsaw's are fine homeowner type mills and I would'nt mind having one but to compare them to the bigger production mills such as Frick, Corley, American, or others is like comparing import tools to "old arn". They will get the job done but its hard to replace the mass of good cast iron with structural steel. Just my 2 cents. I would be happy to answer any questions you have. Also check out the other forum I sent you in a pm. you will find a great bunch of people there full of knowledge. I don't know where you are located but theres bound to be a miller close to you that would be glad to help you.