Whizzy

[stig]

Doubt it.
From what I've seen of your work, you've got plenty of cojones.

I'll do a trick cut when I see the need for it, but in the total percentage of the trees I fall, it is maybe under one half a percent or less.

When I do it, it is for a specific reason, such as saving myself the work of clearing a bridle path or logging road, saving a valuable log or bypassing some second growth.

I never "just" do it.

But of course, being the ?ber narcissistic type, whenever I pull one off, I'll show it here

 

[Burnham]

For sure!

 

[RegC]

Therein lies the weakness of all these gimmick cuts. They appeal to our desire to make things go "better". I totally get that, and followed down that path many a time in my years as primary hazard tree faller on a big National Forest in even bigger tree country. But in the end, I found my way back to more traditional methods, more often than not. From time to time, sure, I still used the gimmicks, and fairly often got something close to desired results. But more often, I didn't really get what I was after.

So truth be told, that means next to nothing. Maybe I just don't have the chops to make it so. I don't really think so, plenty of evidence otherwise over more than 30 years of felling uglies...but it could be.

"Gimmick cuts" Couldn't have put it better. Thanks Burnham.

I haven't read the whole thread, just the most recent pages. No offence meant.

 

[stig]

I just think of them as tools, Reg.
They have their place in logging, one just has to know their limitations.

No offence taken.

 

[squisher]

Kiss is best at the stump. But heh, I'm just a bystander now. So it's really easy to criticize. Lol.