346 vs 260

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

What one is more fuel efficient?

  • 346xp

    Votes: 11 68.8%
  • MS 260

    Votes: 5 31.3%

  • Total voters
    16

biggenius29

Addicted to ArboristSite
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
2,290
Reaction score
277
Location
Hamilton Michigan
Based on fuel consumption alone what saw will be more efficient? And by how much, will one blow the other one out of the water or will the difference be minimal?
 
It takes fuel to make HP, so the 3.8hp vs 3.2hp sort of tells the tale. The 260 will use less fuel, but will get less work done. If you were just bucking 12"+ logs, I doubt the difference would be readily apparent. The 260 would be cutting longer to get the same work done, hence, using less fuel but for a longer time.
 
Given each saw turns the chain about the same speed and it takes say roughly .5 hp just to turn the chain at full RPM. then the 346 should have a slight advantage efficiency wise.

If the 346 motor produces 3.8 hp at the crank and .5 hp is used up just turning the chain then 3.3 hp is left at the wheels so to speek. thats then 86.8% of the HP from the motor getting to the wood.

If the 260 produces 3.2 hp at the motor then it is only 2.7 hp to the wood thats then only 84.4% of the HP from the motor getting to the wood.

Also the 4 port designs of the husky vs the older stihl model have potential for cleaner scavenging and less intermixing of new charge and exhaust. Why do you think newer stihls under strict EPA rules are going to 4 port designs? The 4 port design should also be another efficiency point for husky, from a practicle stand point it allows lower transfer port timing to achieve the same RPM allowing more exhaust to escape before transfers open reducing intermixing and reducing the amount of new charge going out with the exhaust and wasting fuel.
 
.....

Also the 4 port designs of the husky vs the older stihl model have potential for cleaner scavenging and less intermixing of new charge and exhaust. Why do you think newer stihls under strict EPA rules are going to 4 port designs? The 4 port design should also be another efficiency point for husky, from a practicle stand point it allows lower transfer port timing to achieve the same RPM allowing more exhaust to escape before transfers open reducing intermixing and reducing the amount of new charge going out with the exhaust and wasting fuel.


I guess you nailed this one as well! :cheers:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top