Talk:Crosscut saw

message: Tidied article, removed uncited trivia entry. --81.77.15.123 19:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I was seeing over at Two-man saw that someone proposed merging it with this article a while back but never brought it up here.  It seems like a good idea, since almost all of that article just talks about crosscut saws.  There's a short section on large chainsaws, but that seems like it would be better over at Chainsaw, if it is even worth keeping.  I think Two-man saw should probably just redirect to this article. Sxeptomaniac 19:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No expert in lumberwork, but given pics like these, surely a two-man saw is not the same as a crosscut saw, even if there exist two-man crosscut saws. JackyR | Talk 23:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[Two-man saw]] 

message: Underbucking is a crosscut technique that's got its own short article. Seems well suited to a section in this article. Jojalozzo 18:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually underbucking should probably be merged into log bucking. 184.19.104.1 (talk) 23:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Or it could be merged into both this article and log bucking.  I don't see why not. 184.19.104.1 (talk) 00:48, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose. I think underbucking and log bucking are so closely related they should be merged and log bucking mentioned in this article.Jim Derby (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: With the lack of input I removed the merge templates for Underbucking to Crosscut saw. Jim Derby (talk) 15:11, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from Underbucking 

message: Regarding the crosscut saw vs chainsaw section.  What was written by the previous editor about safety and effectiveness of crosscut saws reflects what Forest Service trail crew members are often told, but in my experience much of it is just not true, and few people with significant chainsaw experience believe it.   There is unlikely to be any unbiased written sources for any of this, so perhaps it should all just be removed.  I have spent my working life, 20 seasons, on trail crews and have bucked many thousands of trees with both crosscut saws and chainsaws, and feel that I am as good an authority as anyone on the subject.  I changed it to better reflect what I believe is the reality.  Crosscut saws are much better tools than people who haven't used them assume, but the chainsaw restriction on Forest Service wilderness is a major limitation on their ability to maintain their trails, and should be recognized as such.  Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments.Kneejam (talk) 17:20, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  crosscuts vs chainsaws 

message: QR codes in place Elrebe56 (talk) 06:16, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: QR code installed

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Crosscut saw. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100530102709/http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/download/hep/fspubs/pdf77712508hi.pdf to http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/download/hep/fspubs/pdf77712508hi.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:42, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Under the "Common Features" section of the article it says: "A felling saw is generally less stiff than a bucking saw ...the thinner, lighter design is easier to use without gravity holding the blade against the cut."
Yet, under the "Vintage saw versus modern saws" section, it says: " modern saws have some advantages over vintage saws such as stiffness which is useful for felling..."
So one section of the same article says a felling saw should be "less stiff" while another section says that stiffness is "useful for felling...". A reader could easily be confused..  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tschurin (talk • contribs) 23:21, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like you are correct, there is a contradiction. Since the commentary about stiffness is not well sourced, it looks like there is a need to not only correct the text but to offer suitable references. Damotclese (talk) 15:15, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  A contradiction? 

message: The caption on the first image is "Two-man felling saw and springboard".  What is a springboard and how is it used?  There are pages on springboards but nothing that applies to sawing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.141.175.34 (talk) 14:44, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Springboard?