Stihl quality over the years?

[lesorubcheek]

Can't say anything regarding stihls since I've never touched one, but this topic touches many commercial items. What I see lots of times is that today we have superior technology and engineering with reduced quality of materials in place.
Andy's statement regarding vibration of an older saw wasn't a quality issue of the saw... it was a result of engineering at the time. All the saws vibrated! Did people think they were buying a poor quality saw just because it turned their knuckles white? Of course not! Improvements in design through engineering helped build newer products with less vibration. Nothing to do with the issue of quality.
Improvements in overall performance does not have a direct coorelation with the quality of components used for their manufacturing. There's as much emphasis from most businesses to reduce production costs as there are to improve a products functionality. Many times, fit and finish of a particular component can have reduced "quality" to reduce production costs and have little to no effect on the overall products performance. Why overbuild a component if it can still perform its function? It just adds to the cost. Does this mean the newer product quality is inferior? As far as how it functions, usually not. Sometimes there may be issues of reduced longevity or ruggedness, but it all depends on product specifics.
So what does all this crap I just spouted really mean. Well to sum it up I guess what I'm trying to say is that stuff made today usually performs better than stuff made 20-30 years ago, but when you look at the guts, things looked like they had a better fit and finish and materials "look better" in the older days. Always exceptions, but this is what I see in lots of stuff like saws, cars, tools, etc.

Dan

 

[stihl only]

It's a slow day, so why not add my 2 cents.

On the rare occasion that I do a warranty claim, I have to remember how to do it because it has been that long! The stuff is that good!

Things may look different than they used to, but there are a lot of reasons for this. Think about what the consumer demands these days, as well at what EPA and ANSI, etc demand.

We all want lighter weight saws with higher chain speeds, and more power. We want low vibration levels so we can cut all day. All the while, EPA wants them to be clean and use as little bar oil as they can. They have to comply with all of the current safety regulations because the consumer is no longer responsible for their actions, if they should happen to get hurt.

A lot of the manufacturing costs have been kept down with hi tech machines, not by out sourcing low bid components.

At the same time, the amount of engineering that goes into the current generation of saws is staggering.

I think the current designs, and those just a few years back, are going to be as good as it gets!

The next generation of cleaner saws will have a lot of folks missing the older ones, but they will prove to be durable just like the 441s are and they will be what's available new, so we'll just learn to deal with it!

 

[wood4heat]

I am sure it has effected the price by process, but they also know a lot more about how the air flows now, in some instances, porosity can improve laminar flows if that is what he engine-er wanted?

This was my thought as well. As for the flat top vs domed piston I went to a flat top piston in my MX bike for an increase in the cyl charge. You will lose compression by going from domed to a flat top so I took 100 thousandths off the head. My intent was to increase compression beyond stock so I wouldn't recommend taking that much unless you want to run race gas.

One thing I would like to add expanding on Shoer's comment. When porting cylinders they leave the intake and transfers rough only polishing the exhaust port.

 

[wigglesworth]

I understand about cost. I work in a manufacturing plant that is all about cutting costs. That is good business. The purpose of my post was to display the obvious where the costs have been cut. To average Joe (sorry anybody named Joe)they will never see the difference, and obviously not know the power that he is missing from his rough ports. But to us this just happens to also be the place where we go to to pull more performance from our saws. We understand that smoother ports = more power, less carbon, better flow, where Joe could care less. So in the long run, Joe does not care and cuts a ton of wood happy as ever, its only to us few who insist on modification that the difference will ever be known. So...... Stihl isn't going to change their casting procedure to make us few gear heads happy. So.....looks like i will have to buy a dremel. Me likey tools

 

[Taxmantoo]

Joat, the modern day CPI has lost its soul, just like those new Stihls.....Today the CPI is just some magical numbers pulled out of a black hat, by some crooks, to mislead the masses.

True, but if you use some substitute for an unadulterated CPI which shows inflation to be worse than the BLS numbers, it just makes Joat's argument stronger.

 

[Fish]

Wigglesworth, where in Ky are you.

I knew a guy in Versailles with that name.

Just curious, I am not a stalker. Well...... Not a dangerous one...

 

[wigglesworth]

The Great Purchase Area!!

 

[Fish]

Huh?

 

[blackoak]

Can't say anything regarding stihls since I've never touched one, but this topic touches many commercial items. What I see lots of times is that today we have superior technology and engineering with reduced quality of materials in place.
Andy's statement regarding vibration of an older saw wasn't a quality issue of the saw... it was a result of engineering at the time. All the saws vibrated! Did people think they were buying a poor quality saw just because it turned their knuckles white? Of course not! Improvements in design through engineering helped build newer products with less vibration. Nothing to do with the issue of quality.
Improvements in overall performance does not have a direct coorelation with the quality of components used for their manufacturing. There's as much emphasis from most businesses to reduce production costs as there are to improve a products functionality. Many times, fit and finish of a particular component can have reduced "quality" to reduce production costs and have little to no effect on the overall products performance. Why overbuild a component if it can still perform its function? It just adds to the cost. Does this mean the newer product quality is inferior? As far as how it functions, usually not. Sometimes there may be issues of reduced longevity or ruggedness, but it all depends on product specifics.
So what does all this crap I just spouted really mean. Well to sum it up I guess what I'm trying to say is that stuff made today usually performs better than stuff made 20-30 years ago, but when you look at the guts, things looked like they had a better fit and finish and materials "look better" in the older days. Always exceptions, but this is what I see in lots of stuff like saws, cars, tools, etc.

Dan

+1 You saved me a lot of typing.

 

[wigglesworth]

The Jackson Purchase. As far west as you can go.