Does stihl make a saw that isn't bulky for it's size?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
The width on a stihl serves a purpose...to keep it from rolling around in the back of the truck.:laugh: most huskys i have need a kick stand on the flywheel side.:laugh:

The outboard clutched Huskies definitely have a roll over problem. The inboard cltched saws like the 390XP don't fall over any more than an equivalent Stihl.
 
The width on a stihl serves a purpose...to keep it from rolling around in the back of the truck.:laugh: most huskys i have need a kick stand on the flywheel side.:laugh:

Most Huskys just need to get kicked around....(like Bushy...)

They are dirty rotten stinky hoars. Oops saws. :D
All Stihls are more better then stinky huskys
 
Regarding the life time of saws, I don't think that any of the newer saws will make it even half as long as their ancestors - that would be bad for business and manufacturers can no longer afford making good products for varrious reasons...

100% pure truth !!
:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
 
Bulkiness is a factor of the whether or not your chosen saw has the piss-rev option installed from the factory. Generally these are heavier (except 262xp) and require extra hardware to take advantage of this option. However if this option is added in the aftermarket, say by the monkey or terry (or any other the other fine saw massagers on here), then the saw can effectively piss-rev without additional weight/bulkiness.
 
The 661 should be in the 394/395 class but seems to be more comparable to the 390 class of saw. It really too bad since its closer in cc's to the bigger Husky. Put on a 36, 42, or 50 inch bar and see how it will compare with the 395. And the big and admittedly bulky 395 has an oiler that certainly outclasses the Stihl. I always found the 395's way more bulky looking than the 660's, but thats acceptable because its way more saw as well. The spec sheet doesn't tell the whole truth at only .1hp difference. Anybody who has run both knows.
 
385/390's were 660 killers. 394/395 are 100cc saws with 94cc's of displacement, and are basically their own class. The 661 (never run one) looks to be a 390 killer (short stroke, quad port, spring AV), and we'll have to wait to see how the 590 stacks up. That being said, a new ported 390/2188 from Terry Landrum is prolly the most new saw for the money the universe has ever seen
 
The outboard clutched Huskies definitely have a roll over problem. The inboard cltched saws like the 390XP don't fall over any more than an equivalent Stihl.

The most roll over inclined Husky is the 346xp I suppose,
still many people think that it is one of the best saws ever
maid :) ... . And outbord clutch (inboard sprocket) is me-
chanically better than the opposite :) ... .

Just the (void of fluids) 3120xp motor head is big as a full
size domestic vacuum cleaner motor head and weighs mo-
re than two Stihl MS200 with cutting equipment and all
fluids :) ... . If you fill the Husky up with fluids and put on
cutting equipment it weighs like three and a half Sthil MS
200 (with cutting equipments and all fluids) and is very
hard to carry with one hand because lack of balance (top-
heavyness (despite its heavy motor head))

DSC00876.JPG DSC00049.JPG
 
the 3120 isn't that heavy, try swinging a 090g around it will make a man cry after 20 minutes.
 
Yes - let me explain myself here - of course the weight
in itself of a 3120xp is no problem for a well-built bloke
like myself :) - please do not misunderstand me there :)
- it is the fact that the tip of my 3120xp hangs down like
40 degrees or so which makes it impossible to carry it at
normal carrying-height (the reach of ones arm) - inste-
ad one has hold it up at waist height or so which feels
unnatural and is tireing - unless one chooses to carry it
backwards and drag the tip after oneself in the soil :) ... .

How much weighs a Stihl 090 by the way? (I tried to buy
one once, but with hindsight I am glad I didn't as there
seems to be some convincing arguments for that its power
is much exagregated (perhaps like that of "muscle cars")
:) ... ?
 
33lbs for the 090G 106cc
30lbs for the 090 137cc
those saws are known for torque they are not fast turning either they make around 13hp at 6500 rpm
 
Thanks - that's a lot of weight if it is just the motor head ... .

As for the power figures, I have seen those seriously critizied
somewhere and have also written about it at another forum
- but I have forgot the details - 13hp is about 50% more hp/
displacement unit than modern saws, after all ... . Clearly,
there are some old big two-cylinder two-man saws with 3/4
pitch chain etc with more power than is considered healthy
nowadays, but I do a little distrust Stihl 090 should be one
of those just from what I sort of found by "looking around"
a couple of years ago - not that I have never seen one, held
one or even less owned one :) ... .

I mean if your take your Kawa 750 cc 1970-ies two-stroke
70-75 hp (which is again most likely an exagreagated pap-
er figure) or so motorcycle to a modern engine tuner/build-
er he/she gives you like 125 hp with lowered emissions and
fuel consumptions as well as bettered driveability properties
together with a back-wheel test protocol to certify what you
have :) ... - see here

olle006.gif
 
Wide bottom girls need lovin too...
somebody say " fat bottomed girl you make the rockin world go round"
images
 

Latest posts

Back
Top