Talk:Micro Sawmill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
----- | ----- | ||
I love this idea. While the [[ | I love this idea. While the [[Sawmill]] is also of interest, I really like the lo-tek approach to mechanizing a simple bow saw. Bow saw blades are very in expensive and are available in a variety of tooth count, size, shape, etc. Granted it would be substantially slower than a circular or band saw design, but in many cases, that just doesn't matter. I also think that this design is FAR safer to operate than either the circular or band saws. Finally, instead of an electric motor, we can use a hydraulic motor and drive it off of a power cube (or better still, the steam engine. - [[Mark J Norton]] | ||
:The power cube is an entirely different power scale (40 hp) vs 0.1-0.5 hp for this sawmill. A reciprocating design this size would be torn apart by an engine that powerful. [[User:DanielRavenNest|DanielRavenNest]] 11:12, 16 May 2011 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 18:12, 16 May 2011
Good. Are you considering a Dimensional Sawmill like we are? Email me if you'd like to manage the project - Marcin.
I love this idea. While the Sawmill is also of interest, I really like the lo-tek approach to mechanizing a simple bow saw. Bow saw blades are very in expensive and are available in a variety of tooth count, size, shape, etc. Granted it would be substantially slower than a circular or band saw design, but in many cases, that just doesn't matter. I also think that this design is FAR safer to operate than either the circular or band saws. Finally, instead of an electric motor, we can use a hydraulic motor and drive it off of a power cube (or better still, the steam engine. - Mark J Norton
- The power cube is an entirely different power scale (40 hp) vs 0.1-0.5 hp for this sawmill. A reciprocating design this size would be torn apart by an engine that powerful. DanielRavenNest 11:12, 16 May 2011 (PDT)