Thread: Info on 10/30 Lucas Mill

Hey Jason, welcome !!

I have a 6-18, reckon it is the best thing since sliced bread (if you've lurked on the forum long enough - you'll already know) Anyway, I've spoken to Warren, Ian and Dudley a few times about the 10-30 and one thing they all say about it, is it cuts like the 6" saw. Apparently the 8's have had 'noisy' but totally fine gearboxes and the cut was a bit rough on the 8's as compared to the 6's, but with the work Lucas have done on the 10's gearbox they reckon it cuts like the 6's. I've not payed with an 8 so don't know the difference they are talking about with the cut, but I have to admit (you probably will too) the 6 cuts a nice stick of timber.

I'm hanging out to get the coin together for a 10-30 - I don't get call for much wider stuff, but the idea of cutting a step tread anytime I wanted; that's just great

That's my thoughts and opinions, oh here's another thought - you get a 10-30, have Lucas deliver it here and I'll 'tune' it for you for free - might take about 6 months to get it just right but you'll be glad ya did

Welcome Jason.
Dudley had one of the 10-30 models at a demo day a while back and i thought it was a pretty impressive bit of gear. Definately a lot quieter than my 8" and he was ripping 10 x 2's off a piece of blue gum with ease.
If i had the brass, it would be on my Christmas list.
cheers.
Rob.

I have a 6in . Saw the 10in at a field day with Ian Schultz , certainly impressed me . Will stick with my 6 as it handles all my needs ,and i own it . 10in quite a bit bigger than the eight ,but if you need it a very nice piece of equipment ,especially with the dedicated slabber.

Thanks All for your responses

Sounds like every body is as impressed by this machine as I was when I saw it at a demo day, hoping the increased kerf will be offset by larger cutting dimensions in turn less cut to slice log up. So at the end of the day it all comes down to size and dose size matter? An extra 4" possibly on every board (nice in theory but doesn't always happen) is it worth the outlay.

Has anyone played with the use of hollow ground teeth, I have heard it improves cutting speed by up to 20% ??.

Take care
Jason

An extra 4" possibly on every board (nice in theory but doesn't always happen) is it worth the outlay.

for 90% of my jobs a 6" mill would be more than adequate.
since i got my mill i have only needed to double cut 3 times. iv gut about 50 10" boards.

but it is the same with anything. no matter how big it is its not quite big enough.

dont get me rong if i had teh $ id buy the 10 but thats just because i like to have stuff.

looked at it as well would love one to cut 10" boards but all the times that it is not required the timber wasted with the wider kerf blade would add up and i would reckon it would take a little more effort to push all day as well.

Hang on...

the 6" model saws come with 5mm kerf,
the 8" model mills come with 5.7mm kerf,
the 10" mill comes with 6.1mm kerf.

So if comparing a 6" to a 10" you are only looking at an increase of less 22% but with an engine increase of 60% so I'd say that means it still cuts easier???

Look at a 3.0m 150x50 with a model 6, that is 0.001cube of kerf per board as compared to a model 10 cutting a 6x2, with 0.00122 cube of kerf, so the difference between the two is 0.00022 cubic metres per stated board - I reckon that is pretty bloody small???

Similar to what Carl mentioned, I've lost a few jobs with not having a larger mill - not very many, but a few. I just love the added flexibility of a model 10

I'm with JMaxwell. It's not just the kerf, but the boards pinching on the plate that causes drag. In fact, I'd say that was the single largest factor in boards cut from the lower 1/3 of logs. The 10" is likely to be even more prone to blade flex that the 8, so it may be more likely to tend to "follow" sloping grain.

None of that means "don't buy one", but it pays to have your eyes open. FWIW, I'd love one.

The model 8's come with a blade 3.2mm thick and kerf of 5.7mm, the 10's come with a blade 4.55mm thick and a kerf of 6.1mm, so I'd believe if the blade was 'set' correctly and the sawyer was doing their job well, no issues; this is exactly why I mill with a wedge in my back pocket - easy to et hold of quickly to eliminate any tension pinching the boards. Mind you I find the bottom 1/3 isn't as bad as the top 1/3.

A blade following grain would surely be a factor of blade sharpness and pushing the blade too hard - wouldn't it?

1.1mm not much . 1.1mm x 125mm(4x1top and oneside)=.0001375 not much.by 1000l/m of decking or flooring .1375m3 ,10000l/m 1.375m3 .So the 1.1mm does add up .The model 8 has the same motor as the 10 .The bigger blade ,gearbox and frame would have to make it harder to push and swing all day

Originally Posted by Sigidi

A blade following grain would surely be a factor of blade sharpness and pushing the blade too hard - wouldn't it?

Yes, but to avoid it you sometimes have to go very slowly indeed. I must admit that I'd not read the specs on the blade for the 10, I'm just speculating as the the flexibility, but it seems logical that there would be much higher forces on the rim than with the 8, especially if trying a full-depth cut.

I'd also be concerned about chipped teeth. With the 8, a couple of teeth chipped by a nail or by another tooth getting knocked off can really drive the blade sideways.

Originally Posted by jmaxwell

1.1mm not much . 1.1mm x 125mm(4x1top and oneside)=.0001375 not much.by 1000l/m of decking or flooring .1375m3 ,10000l/m 1.375m3 .So the 1.1mm does add up .The model 8 has the same motor as the 10 .The bigger blade ,gearbox and frame would have to make it harder to push and swing all day

Admittedly John, if the primary use for the mill was to cut feed stock, then there'd be no reason for a model 10. On my 6-18, I'd even be inclined to talk with central saws and sort out something like a low kerf blade specifically for feedstock - something similar to (much as I hate to admit it...) Petersons Micro kerf blade - 3.5mm, then each cut is 1.5mm less and again over 100lm the saw will work easier and recovery will be brought up a bit. Come to think of it, no reason why a 10" blade couldn't be 'converted' into a smaller kerf blade for feedstock....

But as a mobile saw milling service, with who knows what customer requirements you may face, I like the perceived flexibility of the model 10 - can't wait to get the boss convinced on one - wish me luck

Originally Posted by Exador

Yes, but to avoid it you sometimes have to go very slowly indeed.

That's where I find sharpening the blades has it's advantages over running 'em until you just replace the tips.

Originally Posted by Exador

I must admit that I'd not read the specs on the blade for the 10, I'm just speculating as the the flexibility,

I didn't know them off the top of my head, but that's why I checked 'em out to see what I was talking about.

Originally Posted by Exador

but it seems logical that there would be much higher forces on the rim than with the 8, especially if trying a full-depth cut...

Craig, what do you mean by higher forces? I can understand the blades running at different speeds, thus keeping tip speed similar, higher force... the model 10 would take out 2" more of timber in a 10" cut, but the model 8 can't do that, so it'd be like comparing apples to oranges wouldn't it? If you compared an 8" cut for both model 8 and model 10, then the model 10 would be working easier than the model 8 as the angle the blade cuts the timber fibers would be better than being full depth with a model 8??? (also not forgetting full depth cuts are only advised when in the vertical cut, not the horizontal; where Lucas recommend good practice is to take two bites to do full size horizontal cuts)

Originally Posted by Exador

I'd also be concerned about chipped teeth. With the 8, a couple of teeth chipped by a nail or by another tooth getting knocked off can really drive the blade sideways.

Again, I tend not to use blades with chipped teeth if I can help it; makes the saw work much harder than it needs to for the sake of 5 mins changing the blade - although there are always exceptions to that, like when a fella has logs which seem to be held together with nails and I only had 3 blades, over 160k from my sawdoctor, then you just keep going hey Craig

Originally Posted by Sigidi

That's where I find sharpening the blades has it's advantages over running 'em until you just replace the tips.

Sometimes that's not enough. i recently milled a large grey gum that had a big region of sloping grain thanks to some crotchwood about halfway along. It didn't matter what I did, the blade wandered at that point unless I went so slowly as to be ridiculous. With freshly sharpened teeth on a new blade.

Originally Posted by Sigidi

Craig, what do you mean by higher forces? I can understand the blades running at different speeds, thus keeping tip speed similar, higher force... the model 10 would take out 2" more of timber in a 10" cut, but the model 8 can't do that, so it'd be like comparing apples to oranges wouldn't it? If you compared an 8" cut for both model 8 and model 10, then the model 10 would be working easier than the model 8 as the angle the blade cuts the timber fibers would be better than being full depth with a model 8??? (also not forgetting full depth cuts are only advised when in the vertical cut, not the horizontal; where Lucas recommend good practice is to take two bites to do full size horizontal cuts)

A blade only drifts off-line because the forces on it are unequal. The further from the hub a given force is applied, the greater the likelihhod that the blade will flex. Think of a diving board. Sawdust build-up under the blade doesn't have to push very hard at an 8" blade to get it to move a mm or so compared to a 6" and a 10" would need even less force for the same torque.

For a saw blade, the situation is made worse because the blade is also spinning, leading to the possibility of effects like gyroscopic precession, which is where the blade experiences a force in one plane and reacts by exerting a force of its own at 90 degrees. For example, if the front of the blade experiences a force pushing it straight down, that may cause the blade to exerience a net force pushing the side of the blade down, causing the whole thing to wobble. Wikipaedia has a good article if you're interested. The gyroscopic effect is proportional to the moment of inertia of the disk, which is proportional to its diameter. The reason the plate is so much thicker is to cope with that effect, I suspect. The tip speed is close to constant across all 3 sizes I assume, so the impact force on the teeth is no different, although the angle of attack might vary quite a bit, possibly causing some variation in actual stress on the tip.

Originally Posted by Sigidi

Again, I tend not to use blades with chipped teeth if I can help it; makes the saw work much harder than it needs to for the sake of 5 mins changing the blade - although there are always exceptions to that, like when a fella has logs which seem to be held together with nails and I only had 3 blades, over 160k from my sawdoctor, then you just keep going hey Craig

You country boys are spoiled, down in the city here, even the trees have piercings...

I try to use my blades until they're unusable. It takes 15-20 minutes to swap out a blade, so unless it's drifting off-line enough to make the cuts fail to meet, I'll usually just dial the dimensions up a touch to compensate and keep going until I finish the log. Sometimes, that can't be done if even one tooth has an angle chipped off the square end.