Boy, mine sure didn't with a 25" bar.
400c Rumors… or just internet trolls.
- Thread starter JKendrick87
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
JKendrick87
ArboristSite Operative
I don’t think you’ll be disappointed in making the switch. Consensus from research on here and other places Stihl light bar is a tough one to beat.
I don't doubt it whatsoever. The 400 sounds like all of the autotune saws I have ran and/or listened to. They are on the edge of lean. Speed at the expense of torque. Great for limbing. Compromised when bucking full bar cuts.
The m-tronic saws are tuned right. They don`t have to be pig rich as most guys like to run their saws. They are slightly on the rich site which is enough.
WI_Hedgehog
You bought a WHAT???!!
I put three new bars on the scale, all use the same driver link count:
STIHL 25" Rollomatic ES (Germany): 60.5 oz = 3.8 lb = 1.7 kg
Sugihara Lightweight 24" (Japan):
46.5 oz = 2.9 lb = 1.3 kg (23% lighter)
STIHL 25" Rollomatic ES Light (Germany):
41.5 oz = 2.6 lb = 1.2 kg (11% lighter yet)
To me the differences in handling are noticeable. If one considered the MS 400C "a bit heavy" with the ES bar it's "pretty darn good" with the ES Light bar.
STIHL currently does not have a grease hole for the nose sprocket and considers them "permanently lubricated." I have to wonder if they designed the bearing system to use STIHL bar oil as it is very tacky and could possibly do the job--"permanently lubricated" seems a bit of a stretch. I run STIHL bar oil on ES bars ("E-Super" bars, not "E" bars which are laminate) and haven't had an issue. (The Sugihara has a grease hole.)
Oiling a 25" bar is not a problem, the MS 400 oils conservatively the way most every new STIHL does, their bars and chains are designed for it. I max out the oiler on large logs but turn the oil setting to minimum for brush cutting otherwise it will over-oil. For sappy stuff you could turn the oiler up and coat the bar with the excess oil so it stays clean.
This is exactly right.
Most guys just are not accustomed to a saw that runs right.
Bar oil is what lubes the tip regardless if it has a grease hole or not. Any grease you pump in the tip is expelled almost immediately once you start cutting. About the only time I grease bar tips is when I lay them up in storage.
The ES Light is a very good bar. I have one and a cannon light bar in the same length. The cannon is a very nice bar, but is heavier than the Stihl light for certain.
Lightning Performance,
From some of your previous answers about technical things on saws, I figure this question might be easily explained by you on some older saws I have.
I know it is not specifically on track here in the 400C thread, but it is top end related. I thought maybe you might have an answer for me.
A few years ago, I bought 2 well used and a little abused, Stihl 1111 series saws. An 075 and an 051. I pulled the top ends off both to find scoring and aluminum transfer so I got OEM top ends for both. The markings are all correct, and the boxes etc, But upon eyeballing things, I found quite different looking cylinders than what I presume were the original factory ones. Basically the differences amount to fatter casting of the fins which leave less air space vs thin fins and more air space on the old ones.
Ever seen this and know why they look different? I can think of one possible reason if I compare what I know about 044 cylinders for example. Mahle vs KS etc. I didn't think to look to see if a different "vendor" made the new ones I got.
Here are 2 examples from ebay that illustrate what I have.
1st pic is thin fin, 2nd is fatter fin.
Nope, not lean or even in the edge of it. There's a big difference between pig rich and tuned right. You're used to tuned rich. Which isn't wrong, but its sure not right.
It's right for full bar bucking, imo. Oh well. I guess my explanation why a 60cc echo runs equal to a 67cc Stihl doesn't cut it with you guys. I was trying to give the Stihl a way out of being owned in a test.
The 400 doesn't look very special in that test. At all.
Pig rich is a stretch for how that echo is tuned. Imo it's perfect. The Stihl is lean in that application. Imo.
I like it when my saw has that perfect little warble in long cuts. On the edge of rich is not pig rich. On the edge of lean is the autotune way, but whatever floats your boats I guess..
The 400 doesn't look very special in that test. At all.
Pig rich is a stretch for how that echo is tuned. Imo it's perfect. The Stihl is lean in that application. Imo.
I like it when my saw has that perfect little warble in long cuts. On the edge of rich is not pig rich. On the edge of lean is the autotune way, but whatever floats your boats I guess..
I guess a lot of that test depends on where the income for the video originates from. 4.4 hp vs 5.4 hp.
JKendrick87
ArboristSite Operative
I’ve watched other videos from that particular channel and he’s looked for things not to like about the 400 since he got it over two years ago.I guess a lot of that test depends on where the income for the video originates from. 4.4 hp vs 5.4 hp.
It's YouTube. Of course the test was BS.
The guy was a stihl tech and owns a bunch of stihl's. He was just comparing them.I guess a lot of that test depends on where the income for the video originates from. 4.4 hp vs 5.4 hp.
But I learned alot of folks test different. Like him dawging in isnt the way I would do a speed test for time.
I'd be listening to the r's doing a straight down cut. Not pulling out of the rpm during the speed cut for time.
400 562 tested better here. Couple different ways in cuts.
I watched the vid again.
Both saws are tuned nicely. I prefer the tune on the shinny. Just a hair richer.
What I noticed in the video is that the chain when on the stihl is not cutting as well. The operator is sure to drag half the chain over a rock before he starts to cut with the stihl..?
Did I see that ?
Both saws are tuned nicely. I prefer the tune on the shinny. Just a hair richer.
What I noticed in the video is that the chain when on the stihl is not cutting as well. The operator is sure to drag half the chain over a rock before he starts to cut with the stihl..?
Did I see that ?
To do a proper test would require identical wood and an operator very skilled in saw operation. In addition for any sort of valid statistical analysis it would require way more than one cut.
A dynonisnt perfect, but would be more accurate than these half azzed tests.
If money where on the line I would take either of those over an Echo in a saw race.
Similar threads
