andrethegiant70
Addicted to ArboristSite
Isn't the Arboristsite interesting!! I think someone else noted that the subject matter has shifted just a touch in the last several weeks. It's really nice to see us talking a little more about the old mag saws. I suppose it just could be me imagining things, or maybe it's just the time of year when some of the new saw guys step away from the computer and go run 'em.
I have several Dolmars on hand, one a Dolmar 112, and the other a 114. Now, Mike Acres site lists the 114 as being introduced in 1977 and the 112 being introduced in 1986. Of course, this makes no sense at all to me, since they have exactly the same bore/stroke and apparently the same piston. For all practical purposes, the 112 appears to be an evolution of the 114, and yet the 114 gets the higher number designation? Go figure. Can anyone shed any light on this?
I'd like to fix one of these saws up, can one of you Dolmar folks let me know which is the better choice? The 114 is in very nice shape, but 112 is pretty decent also.
I have several Dolmars on hand, one a Dolmar 112, and the other a 114. Now, Mike Acres site lists the 114 as being introduced in 1977 and the 112 being introduced in 1986. Of course, this makes no sense at all to me, since they have exactly the same bore/stroke and apparently the same piston. For all practical purposes, the 112 appears to be an evolution of the 114, and yet the 114 gets the higher number designation? Go figure. Can anyone shed any light on this?
I'd like to fix one of these saws up, can one of you Dolmar folks let me know which is the better choice? The 114 is in very nice shape, but 112 is pretty decent also.