Bullspit.
Here's the deal, and it's the only deal:
Saws are made to run on gasoline. "Gasoline," by feredal definition in this country, may contain up to 10% ethanol. (States may require additional labeling: most do.)
If a mfgr is selling a saw in a state, they are warranting that saw for fitness of purpose. And yes, that means using the gasoline available in that state.
If a manufacturer's saw is unfit for the pupose for which it is sold, it's not a hard claim to make in court. If you could get a law student admitted to the bar, he'd win that for you.
Bottom line: auto manufacturers have made cars run on ethanol for twenty years now. If Husky and Stihl don't want to put up the funds to make their saws do so, then perhaps our court system will be more persuasive?
This stinks of class action.
God, I hate to disagree with a Jonsered guy here, but you are spinning out of orbit with this reasoning.
The OEM's are struggling with, but cannot be held responsible for the changing irregularities in todays fuels. Why? Pretty simple. Fuel formulations are determined primarily for autos and their emmisions. And as we know, these fuel blends are changed in many areas for summer vs. winter. The automotive companies are lucky if they have an opportunity to provide input for these fuels. Recently, they have been pushing the oil companies on the low sulfer deisel fuels. There is an ongoing argument between the auto industry and "big oil" regarding who should shoulder the weight of reduced emissions. "Our cars and trucks could run cleaner if we had better fuels".
Chainsaws? Who are those guys? The 2 cycle OEM's have little if anything to say in this discussion. The amount of fuel used in chainsaws is just a few drops compared to the millions of gallons burned on the highways. They are left to try to best figure out, on their own, how to adapt to todays fuels.
Husky's new XP synthetic blend oil is somewhat more tolerant of ethanol, and there was quite a bit of legal hugging and kissing before Sweden would release this formula to be blended by Spectrum Lubricants, as they obviously didn't want to share this with Spectrums' other customers.
Should Vapnut be pissed? Certainly. It's not his fault; but it isn't necessarily Husky's either. He got the short end of the stick just the same as if the wind blew a tree over on his car. Sometimes there is someone else to blame, and sometimes you just have to pay the bill. It's life. Foot stomping and "class action suits" are becoming more and more fashionable today as everybody wants somebody else to pay. But sometimes you just have to suck it up and move on.
But.....could his dealer have done more for him? I think so. And a good relationship with the dealer carries a lot of weight, as does a dealers' relationship with factory guys. Saw pressure tests OK, limiter caps in place, mixed fuel (after shaking) in tank, no AS member mods (couldn't resist), clean air filter.
Your a good customer? Yeah, we can warranty that. Your a ball breaker? We're going by the book and your screwed.
I'm not throwing stones at either Vap or his dealer, but attitudes and relationships carry just as much weight as written policies.