Buncher laying wood down for processor

[JLeBouton]

I would have to say that expecting to double production with the addition of a buncher is a bit much. It does increase production, but not quite by double. We have a few people chasing bunchers with our JP Skidmore fixed heads, and they report good results. Less fuel consumed by processor due to less tracking, reduced undercarriage wear, neater and larger piles for the forwarder, etc... It is another payment, and another operator to consider. I think it all depends on what type of wood you find yourself in and what works best for you. We have some guys that can keep ahead of 2 double bunk forwarders while cutting off the stump with a single harvester, and some that run a buncher, 2 processors, and only run one forwarder.

I wouldn't say that in order to follow a buncher, you need to be running a dangle head. We have had good luck and good response from operators running our fixed heads behind a buncher. We also can customize the knives to be better suited to picking from piles. Operators report 8-10 cords per hour, leaning towards 10 when following a buncher.

Here is a video of one of our systems cutting out of buncher piles. (Note: It's this particular operators first time working out of a pile ever, he normally cuts off the stump but for the purposes of the particular demonstration, I think he did just fine.)

https://youtu.be/aU7luB6quhE

[Gary_C]

Nice video and I agree completely with what you said.

What are the three sorts you are running?

[JLeBouton]

Logs, bolts, and pulp. Thanks.

[Ken]

JLeBouton   I agree the operator did just fine.  I must say though that cutting poplar like that off the stump should also generate some great production numbers. 

[CTL logger]

I've owned CTL equipment for 10 years and been around it since 2000. I can't figure out how it would pay for itself machinery is expensive, i guess if you had a bunch of worn out stuff with no payments it would work. It's another fuel tank to fill another person to employ, maintenance on it to keep up with. It makes more sense to me to run 2 shifts on your processor if you need to increase production.

[barbender]

There's a lot of variables, but it can certainly pencil out in some circumstances. A few things to consider- the processor stays "in the wood" continously, rather than driving back and forth grabbing trees and pulling them back to piles. Bent bars and thrown chains are about eleminated. Basically, you are using each machine in it's most productive form. 1270d and their outfit run a new Ponsse Scorpion behind a new TimberPro buncher, and pick it up with a new Ponsse Buffalo. They would get behind on the payments mighty fast if it wasn't profitable. One other situation that comes to mind, a friend that was running a Ponsse Ergo down in Georgia thinning pine would hire a Bell with a buncher head if the understory was overgrown (hadn't been burned). Obviously a Bell runs way cheaper than a track buncher, but whatever it cost per ton he said he came out ahead, because the thick brush continously threw chains. This way he just drove along and processed piles, his production increase offset the costs by far.

[CTL logger]

There's a lot of variables, but it can certainly pencil out in some circumstances. A few things to consider- the processor stays "in the wood" continously, rather than driving back and forth grabbing trees and pulling them back to piles. Bent bars and thrown chains are about eleminated. Basically, you are using each machine in it's most productive form. 1270d and their outfit run a new Ponsse Scorpion behind a new TimberPro buncher, and pick it up with a new Ponsse Buffalo. They would get behind on the payments mighty fast if it wasn't profitable. One other situation that comes to mind, a friend that was running a Ponsse Ergo down in Georgia thinning pine would hire a Bell with a buncher head if the understory was overgrown (hadn't been burned). Obviously a Bell runs way cheaper than a track buncher, but whatever it cost per ton he said he came out ahead, because the thick brush continously threw chains. This way he just drove along and processed piles, his production increase offset the costs by far.

I can see the upside of it i run a disc saw bottom on a rolly, i haven't thrown a chain or bent a bar in 9 years and don't miss it. One guy near me does it but they say trees can't be cut easily with a dangle head. If we had better quotas i would hire another operator to run both machines after the first 2 guys leave should get at least  10 more loads a week by only hiring one man and not a half million dollar machine. Just my .02

[barbender]

I completely understand where you're coming from, CTL. But I think it can work in some situations.

[deastman]

I appreciate all the comments,  some guys say it works good and others  say it doesn't.  I've gotta do some more research on it

[barbender]

Deastman, it's hard to say. If your cutting scattered, small wood, it will be tough to make production increase very much. You'd probably be better served by getting a rubber tire dangle head processor, IMO.

[1270d]

You really have to watch a bunch/process system before you believe in it.   It makes the processor far more efficient.   
Any given operator has "x" amount of mental ability.   When working bunch piles there is a significant amount of the mental strain associated with route planning and tree felling that is made available for maximizing processing efficiency.      Boom time can be almost zero with a good layout.  Same for drive time.   
Usually it will have a heavier footprint than processing at the stump because of the need for many trees to be laid out at their full length.   

[Jamie_C]

We run feller bunchers ahead of all of our processors, production is roughly double what we can get when cutting off the stump. The stands we normally harvest have high amounts of unmerchantables which really slow down production if we had to cut without a buncher.

A buncher also virtually eliminates bending bars and chain life is also a lot longer, last year running 7 processors double shift we only went through 80 bars and 385 chains in total for the year.

[Gary_C]

I have to believe this is completely dependent on the type of jobs you are cutting. Are these jobs clear-cuts, hardwood thinning's, softwood thinning's or something else?

I do mostly softwood thinning's and normally cut between 4 and 5 cords per hour. Size of trees and amount of slope can cause more variation but no way could I see doubling those rates.

On aspen clearcuts, most guys I know can fly thru those at 60 and up to 125 cords per day with just a harvester but again it is tree size dependent. I can't see doubling those rates. 

[barbender]

They can in aspen clearcuts. I've seen 180-200 cords per day.

[barbender]

This is a picture of a row of our forwarders lined up to get moved after finishing a job. Four forwarders that were picking up behind 1 processor, that was following a buncher in an aspen clearcut. Make of that what you will, as far as production is concerned ;)

[thecfarm]

The guy that cut my lot brought a hotsaw. He was just laying down the wood and than a processor would come in behind him. He was trying to get away from the throwing the chain on cutting small stuff,like 2-3 inches. Just trying to do a neater job,thinning. I think he sold it.