My First Clue Those FT 660's were "real" saws. This was back in 2015...

[weimedog]

Jump ahead.......about half way to around minute 8...was running a bunch of my old 80cc plus saws. Mostly stock....one tweaked (you can hear the different pitch on that one) AND decided to put the "early 2015 built work saw" FT 660 in with all those OEM Bigger saws that had done time as work saws on the farm...my favorites...did timed cuts in their "As they are" configurations. NOT a true comparison as they all were with the B&C's they had on them vs. trying to swap a bar & chain combo through all those saws...didn't matter the results and how they cut pretty much speaks for itself....And I was wanting some of my old favorites to have the edge...but numbers don't lie. Now this last year with a lot more time, that FT 660 has proved reliable and those first signs have turned out to be true...its a beast for the money and time spent. Fact is if I did a scientific comparison..the results would be the same..

 

[chipper1]

I still don't think it's a "real saw", it doesn't have enough orange or red .
Did you do the official test, video of it .
Thanks for all your videos, very informative .

 

[CR888]

If you get a German designed and produced flagship saw of the number 1 outdoor power equipment manufacturer in the world, take it to China and make complete illegal copies of it, you should in theory have something very similar to what you started with. While they have no regard for patent law what so ever, they are capable like any other country to successfully copy a product. To me its not a surprise these saws run similar to genuine 660's.

 

[TheTone]

This puzzles me. The "complete" repair kits are obviously designed to be complete saws. If Huztl is breaking patent law recognized by the U.S. (after all, Stihl saws are manufactured in the U.S. also), then why does the U.S. government allow their importation?