Frick v.s. Meadows vs American

[Celeriac]

I'm looking to poll the collective wisdom about a couple different possibilities in used circular mills.

One is a Meadows #1 portable, all steel. 12' carriage, 3 head blocks,2 sets of air dogs on carriage. Listed capacity is 16' X 25-26". . 42' track.

Then there are several possible Frick mills, either 01's or 1C's. Steel and/or wood, one that is supposedly portable.

• How does the Meadows stack up against Frick?
• Are the setworks comparable?
• What are the different Frick setworks- B vs C?
• How "portable" is the Meadows?
• How do turners, receders, and mudsaws play into decision making?
• What's the best method for powering a portable circular mill?
• Is there a standard to the Frick mill sizes? It seems they increase from 00, 0, 01, 1, 1C? But I've yet to see any actual reference.

I've done some searches through old forum posts, but haven't come up with much in the way of comparisons.

Thanks,
Aaron

[Ron Wenrich]

How about describing what kind of operation you're trying to get.  Do you want something that will be producing a lot of wood, or is this going to be a hobby mill?  What's your business plan?  After that, maybe we can start matching things up better.

What's the reason for wanting the portability?  Portable mills need a power source.  If you can put one on board, that would be great.  But, I don't see how well that would be done.  Jackson makes an automatic portable, and I've run one that was stationary.  You could get pretty good production on one, but you need the equipment to move the support equipment.  There are better options then a circle mill if your goal is portability. 

The problem with the Meadows you have listed is that there isn't much capacity.  26" isn't all that big when you consider what you can run across with many hardwood butts.  I would want a mill with at least a 36" opening.  You won't need all of that, but you will have the occasional log that you will be glad you have it.  I'm also not so crazy about air on a carriage.  You can't feather the controls as you can with a hydraulic system. 

Setworks are pretty good with most mills.  The thing you have to worry about is if they're worn out.  If they're worn too bad, they can slip.  The better the setworks, usually the better the quality of set.  They tend to have more teeth in the ratchet and more pawls that insure they don't slip.  That usually is the most evident in large logs where the log has more resistance to sliding. 

The added accessories are always a plus.  If you are looking at a manual mill, you can nearly turn a log as fast by hand as you can with a turner.  The big logs is where you save time and backache.  You have to have a method of turning logs. 

A receder is a good option.  The receder pulls the headblocks back when you are bringing the carriage back.  If the log is on the carriage, often it will drag it back.  Turning is then a breeze, as all you do is turn down.  Very fast in many cases.  If the log isn't on, it saves a lot of pulling on the setworks to get the opening.   Also, you can advance your headblocks when you bring your carriage forward.  A lot easier for lining up your cut. 

Mudsaws can be OK, but I've only used them on a couple of mills.  They are time consuming if you are using them to knock bark off of all the logs.  What I always found was they were hard to line up with your saw cut.  You are pulling your mill through with one hand and pulling the mudsaw down with the other.  Thick barked species will slow down your sawing considerably.  The amount of time you lose isn't worth the little bit of savings you get from a few less sharpenings. 

[4x4American]

 :P

[beenthere]

What Ron said very well, makes a lot of sense to me.

[Celeriac]

Thanks Ron.

The background story is that I need to build a sizable shop for my wood-dorking equipment. I think cost-wise going with heavy timber construction is my best bet. Right the moment there are a lot of borer kill Ash trees around, and the lumber guys don't want them as the lumber is stained. Supposedly it's still sound, just not cosmetically okay.

That being said, my Mobile Dimension mill limits out at 4"x12", which precludes cutting larger posts and timbers. I have cut a couple 10" posts, but it was a royal pain. Hence the search for a circular mill.

:P I own a copy of Wendel's book on circular mills, of course I cannot find it.

Checking in on the vintagemachinery.org did reveal Frick's catalog #75 http://vintagemachinery.org/pubs/detail.aspx?id=5031

I also found a fellow's Youtube channel, and he has a couple videos discussing the different component sizes on Frick mills. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmttxfiUNfk


In regards to the Meadows, I hadn't really rationalized the opening size, but it is awful small. Upon consideration, it does seem that the Frick #1 is the class of mill that would best suit my interests. I do love the look of quartersawn Sycamore, and Sycamore trees do tend to the large side  ;D

What other mills are in the size class of the Frick #1?

Thanks,
Aaron

[Ron Wenrich]

I'm going to venture out a little on this post by saying I really haven't been around an MD mill too often.  I was around a Mighty Mite, and that runs pretty much the same way.  A lot of this is my opinion, so you should be able to set me straight.

You should be able to cut a bigger post than a 4x12.  You have to turn the log to get your desired size.  But, the problem is you need a set of backstops that will hold your log in place.  It makes turning easier as well as indexing. 

I've always had a vision that either a swing mill or an MD mill would pair up well with a carriage.  The carriage wouldn't have to run on a track, but it would make things easier for loading logs and possibly turning.  The MD or swing mill wouldn't have to be indexed to get the thickness.  It would work from the carriage.  All you need to do is go up and down to cut on a face.  The carriage also dogs a log so it doesn't roll.  Just a thought.

As to what other mills have the size, just find out the size of their opening.  Most mills are comparable, just made by different manufacturers. 

Are you planning to do much sawing after you cut the timbers for your shop?

[dgdrls]

Tough choice both make fine mills, 

MD does make an 8" horizontal blade for the 128,
Not sure that is big enough but may be worth investigating.

Best
DGDrls

[Celeriac]

Glad to hear I am not the only one to ponder on different ideas regarding the MD saw. There are times when it would be nice to roll the log, instead of just cutting top down. The idea of using a carriage to index horizontally is interesting. I think it would take considerable tinkering to get the MD aligned to where a log could be rolled and squared. You would need to fabricate some sort of ells as well. It would be tricky, I think.

In regards to a circular mill, I would like to keep it on past the shop project. I don't see much wisdom in buying a mill just for the shop project. Being on the edge of Amish territory general sawmill work probably is not going to be huge money maker, but I think there could be a niche market of some sort. Just not sure what that market may be. If one had a large capacity mill, there might be some work on long timbers for timber framers.

-Aaron

[Ron Wenrich]

I had a friend that put 2 carriages together and milled 40' timbers on a Frick mill setup.  You obviously need longer track, and you would need a log turner due to the weight of the longer logs. 

Setup of an MD wouldn't be hard if you used a carriage on a track.  Basically your MD becomes a mobile husk that moves across the log instead of the log moving across a stationary head.  Just a little different concept, and as long as the carriage and MD are parallel, the 

There's a Corley #5 advertised in the For Sale section that isn't too far from you.  I think I see the ones you're looking at on Sawmill Exchange.  Some of them look good.

[longtime lurker]

I started playing around about two years back with putting a band mill style hydraulic deck under a  Swingmill. It's yet to be finished - still need to fit the hydraulic stops and turner - but I can tell you that it works. I can pull straight timber from very springy eucalypt logs, and I can pull timber out of logs that most swingmill guys would call unviablely small. 

Once I got it together and tested it using manual backstops and a cant hook I was quick to realize that it worked that well that I needed a bigger better faster mill to make use of it, which is why product development stalled. If it worked with a swingmill it'll work with a twin. D&L do something similar under one of their twinsaws, built a bit light IMHO but the idea is good.

I think there was a time when the idea of a portable circle mill was okay, but the cost benefit curve isn't nice to them... For a circle to be fast it's got to be heavy and have the whole heap of support gear that then needs to be portable too. Thats the one real advantage of a circle mill isn't it... speed. Take away the speed and we might as well get something that requires less labour to run.

[Celeriac]

Well, I have a potential lead on an American mill, so we'll see how that plays out.

On a momentary digression- I've been watching some circular mill videos on the Youtube, most of them are pretty sad. Seems like a lot of folks are running way too much speed, and too many teeth, or way too little horsepower. 

-Aaron

[Ron Wenrich]

Most have too little horsepower.  Speed on the older mills was often around 540 RPM.  I ran one for a guy that was a 350.  They ran the diesel at an idle. 

Too many teeth can be a problem, especially when you put in too little hp. 

[Celeriac]

So the course has shifted a bit. If things go according to plan, I'll be looking at a friction drive American on Sunday.

I don't recall seeing a friction drive mill running, is that indicative of problems with the system? From what I am told, the mill has a 3 pattern blade, wood husk and carriage, and steel under the tracks. 3 head block carriage, possibly 20' long. The mill is under cover, so hopefully rot isn't an issue.

Also, it's a left hand mill. The ergonomics of a left hand mill seems like it might be odd to operate ???

-Aaron

[Ron Wenrich]

I think I've only seen one friction mill.  They're usually pretty old.  But, you can convert over to a hydraulic feed fairly easily.  We switched one over.  It needed a fairly large motor, and the right ratio so it doesn't move too fast and its easy to control.

The 3 pattern saw is for softwoods.  You can still use it in hardwoods, and many do.  B or F pattern saws are most prevalent in hardwoods.  Just make sure you get a saw wrench with it. 

3 headblocks on a 20' carriage, seems like there should be at least one more.  Make sure all the dogs are there and that they work.  The wood husk should be OK.  The carriage will probably show wear on the wood. 

I ran left handed automatics for decades.  There wasn't an issue.  For a hand mill, I don't see where the ergonomics would be too much difference, except at the dogs.  If you're not comfortable with lifting or setting dogs on a left hand mill, then I don't think I would buy the mill.  When I ran a hand mill, I always was lifting the dogs up on the return, as the carriage went past.  It gives you a lot of speed in the process.  On a right hand mill, you do that with your right hand.  On a left hand mill, its the left hand.  Setting dogs is not as much of an issue since you do it mostly when you load or turn a log.  Sometimes you do throw a dog down when you're feeding the saw.  You would also use your left hand to pull the setworks most of the time.  Just something to consider.

Sometimes when they mfg a left hand mill, they use the same headblocks as a right hand mill.  We had that on a new automatic.  Some of the controls seemed backwards.  Its something you can get used to, even on a hand mill. 

[bandmiller2]

A left hand mill is an advantage if your planning to power it with a tractor PTO, the rotation will be proper. On the other hand rotation would be wrong for a standard right turning engine, doable but requires extra gear. Condition and completeness should be the leading factors. The saw is very important as its the most costly part, preferably a spare saw also. If the mill is set up take pictures and measurements especially if the mill was skillfully located and efficient. Always nice if you can see it run but seldom possible. Frank C.

[Celeriac]

It was mentioned that the mill was run with a Farmall M. PTO power would be good in my present situation. Granted I'd be overpowering the mill if it's set to run properly on the 36 ponies an M puts out.

Looking at an old American catalog, it lists the #1 coming with a 16' carriage, and the #2 with a 20'. All mills came standard with two had blocks.

At the time the catalog was published they offered the choice of either friction drive, or the "Heacock" belt drive.

As far as the 3 pattern is concerned, I already have a wrench as the MD mill runs the same.

[Celeriac]

Well, this adventure has gone full circle, pun intended. A friend and I made it to look at the mill, about 375 miles round trip. The mill turns out to be an Enterprise #3.

The wood is shot, and one tooth is broken on the friction drive, so it's a project for sure. The friction drive is quite an ingenious mechanism, completely different from American's drive setup.

There are two drawbacks. One is the logistics of getting it loaded. The other is the dogging system, as it looks like you need to work from the rear of the carriage. It's tough to describe (and I forgot my camera), in a nutshell the dogs are adjusted with a setscrew, then they use a weighted lever with an eccentric to bite in.

Still pondering.

-Aaron