I am big fan of the 441, and I think they have proven themselves well. Stihl got it right with the 441 and I am excited for the strato replacements for the 90+ cc saws.
When the 441 first came out, everyone got all bent out of shape b/c older strato designs with reed valves didn't fair well. Stihl resolved this issue with direct porting, but the quick, uninformed opinions seemed to persist. People whom never ran the saw also thought it was too heavy, underpowered, too hard to work on and couldn't be modified.
The 441 is underpowered...really? Maybe to those who have not run one... I have posted plenty of video running the 441 against modified and stock 440's, 460's and 660's. With a 24" bar, you cannot tell a lick of difference in cuts times. You have to max out the saw with the 32" bar before you get a significant difference in cutting times. Again, this is 32" of bar fully buried in hardwood. My opinion, if you are cutting that big, then you should be using a 90 or 120cc saw anyways. The 441 holds its own on power. And, it does so with less fuel, meaning the 441 is putting out more power per unit of fuel, which in and of itself is a great improvement in saw technology (and fuel and oil savings).
The 441 is too heavy...really? This ain't no limbing saw. Big saws are heavy. We are debating a few ounces here. Man up and get over it...
The 441 is too hard to work on... really? Check this thread; several dealers and techs have made comments to this effect. This argument just doesn't hold up.
The 441 doesn't take to mods...Really? Did you try? Check out slinger's video. The 441 takes well to mods. Several others (peacock, slamm, etc.) have done the same and have noticed improvements. This argument doesn't hold water.
Is the 441 better than the 440? 460? In stock form, absolutely. Can you put a BB kit on a 440/460 and have an incredible power to weight ratio? Absolutely. Is that better than the 441? Depends on how you are gauging 'better'. Will the BB's cut faster? yup. Can you cut more than one tree per tank of fuel? nope. Does a second or two in the cut make up for the extra time not cutting b/c you are refilling the saw? Walking to and from the truck? AV gas and sythetic aren't cheap. Many arborists go through 5 gallons of mix a day. Is fuel efficiency important? you bet. Sure, you may cut a million board feet faster per saw, but by the job you will be far behind in time and money. I am not so sure the 441 was meant to be compared against the 440 - they are two different animals.
The reason for the introduction of 441 may be ambiguous, though there are many specious arguments out there. The venerable 044/440 was arguably Stihl's best saw, so it was the best saw for introducing and gaining acceptance of Stihl's new engine technology. Putting the future of the company in an obscure or unpopular saw is suicide for that company. Why change a good thing? EPA, EU, carbon footprint, clean air, tree huggers....doesn't matter. Technology will always improve. The new strato engines put out the same power as old engines with less fuel - it's more efficient. That's the direction of progress. It's what we do when gain knowledge - we apply it. It doesn't matter if its cars, computers, cell phones or chainsaws.
What was the 441 designed to do? What is its purpose? My conjecture is it was to produce a saw with 1) reduced emissions 2) increased fuel economy 3) maintain the same power and torque 4) reduced vibrationa 5) reliability. Does the 441 have reduced emission (aka, air you are breathing while the saw is running)? yep. Does it have the same power and grunt as older generation saws? yep. Does it do more with less fuel? yep. Is it reliable? yep. Is it a smooth running saw? yep. Can those who like to tinker and play still make the saw perform faster? yep.
Sounds to me like Stihl got it right. IMO, yes, they are panning out.
Either way, I'd rather run a 441 but do prefer the rubber mounts on my 044 and 460.
There is not another 70cc saw like the 044/440 imo, just a plain bad *** package of power and weight.
