Is that 361 not running a 24" bar? How does the Echo do with a 24" bar? The last cut is telling, the 361 is gliding through that wood, with more bar and chain than the Echo, much more strongly.
Echo CS-590 timberwolf vs. Echo CS-600P
- Thread starter Miles86
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Is that 361 not running a 24" bar? How does the Echo do with a 24" bar? The last cut is telling, the 361 is gliding through that wood, with more bar and chain than the Echo, much more strongly.
Keep in mind the 361 is ported, the Echo is just muff modded. Anyone on here that thinks that Echo doesn't cut good? Steve
It's the apple and oranges thing. It's difficult to gauge how well it cuts when you have two very different set ups. It makes it seem like you are trying to make the Echo look good. If you like, I can post up a vid of my ported 361 in similar wood with a more similar B&C set up?
How does that Echo look now? And this is coming from someone whom has an Echo and has used them professionally. I like them, but your vid is a touch misleading.
Speaking of misleading, I forgot to add that set up is an 18" bar, rakers set for bucking at .050, and with an 8 pin rim, and mostly buried in that yellow cedar which is a bit tougher than what appears to be Douglas Fir in your vid(or maybe a Hemlock that appears dark due to the lighting?). So the 361 is holding more revs than your 600p could, pulling twice as much wood out per cutter.
How does that Echo look now? And this is coming from someone whom has an Echo and has used them professionally. I like them, but your vid is a touch misleading.
Speaking of misleading, I forgot to add that set up is an 18" bar, rakers set for bucking at .050, and with an 8 pin rim, and mostly buried in that yellow cedar which is a bit tougher than what appears to be Douglas Fir in your vid(or maybe a Hemlock that appears dark due to the lighting?). So the 361 is holding more revs than your 600p could, pulling twice as much wood out per cutter.
(pulling twice as much wood out per cutter).If that 361 was pulling more wood per cutter with higher chain speed it would be cutting way faster than the Echo, it isn't That's not my vid, I'd guess the Echo is pulling way more wood per cutter as it's turning slower and cutting really close to the ported 361. Every Echo saw I have cuts good cc too cc with Stihl and Huskys best saws but they all need a muff modd, as they come they are at best average with their clogged up muffs and lean tuning. Your vid above proves nothing, we need side by side cutting like the vid I put up. Steve
Steve, you put up a vid of a ported 361 cutting faster than an Echo, with more bar and chain. How are we supposed to be impressed? How are you impressed?
I'll also keep in mind that is a very small piece of wood that appears to be rotten. That video tells us nothing aside form the fact the Stihl is faster, and doing it with more bar and chain, in rotten wood.
They are both cutting the same wood a real close to the same speed, take off you orange and white glasses. The extra length on the bar doesn't matter that much UNLESS it's buried in a big log. I'll repeat they are both cutting the same wood. Steve
If you like clean air, don't fell trees... We are thinking about 10% less emissions at the time we're killing a tree capable to clean large amounts of air...
I like Echos and their simplicity.
BTY
ArboristSite Lurker
A more likely and less biased reason that Echo doesn't post power numbers in the US is so they can't get sued by scumbag lawyers (that could be funded by competitors) that are out to make money off pointless class action lawsuits.
A lack of a standardized power measurement system for small engines and power equipment has left an open door for needless lawsuits in the US.
Many other small engine and power equipment companies (Honda, Briggs, etc.) no longer post power ratings for many or all of their products in the US for the same reason.
Echo still posts power ratings for their equipment elsewhere in the world. It's not hard to convert kW to HP.
The fact is posted HP numbers mean nothing, it's how good they cut. Like any of my CS510, 520 or 530 Echo saws cut WAY faster than a 3.8 hp MS290 or 029 Stihl. Does that mean they have 4.2 hp or does it mean the Stihls hp numbers are bs. Steve
I rarely fell trees, only ones that are a hazard, dead, damaged or a problem of some sort. Burning wood (mostly deadfall like the white oak I'm cutting today) replaced the heating oil we used to use.
But that was a distraction for the point I had made - a saw that lacks strato or a feedback carb cannot run as clean or be as efficient as one that has these technologies. Yesterday's tech, sold cheap.
If trees are left to rot they put co2 back in the air, may as well burn them and get some heat while saving oil. Steve
SawTroll
Information Collector
And yet they cut good vs Stihl and Huskys best saws. Rated HP is what the manufacture puts on a saw. Steve
jughead500
Sasquatch
The epa chokes down what the manufacturers make.we all know that.echo is probably measuring hp on overseas models and guessing at hp ratings with the epa approved muffler and bs installed.
""yesterday's tech, sold cheap""
Intersting that Echo can pass the EPA regs without the smoke and mirrors of stratocharging and feedback carbs...
Intersting that Echo can pass the EPA regs without the smoke and mirrors of stratocharging and feedback carbs...
echoshawn
....Beer is good.....
Notice how the us ope manufacturers are using torque instead of hp for their ratings now? I think it's a better rating to use anyway. If there were a uniform standardized way to measure net power on saws (off the shelf with all emissions controls, air cleaner, etc) I bet the numbers would be a helluva lot closer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
zogger
Tree Freak
Horsepower is marketing, torque gets stuff done...
I really couldn't tell ya what a single saw I have horsepower rating is...I have probably read some of them off spec pages, but promptly forgotten them. The bigger the saw the mo powah it haz....
I know once you get into ported saws, and who/what/when/where how it was ported, etc, perceived and actual power can vary greatly, but....it's sorta silly, too. Any modern type saw of X-displacement will cut within it's design/size parameters, they are all going to be close, so it gets down to how much loot ya got to spend on your saws, what color plastics you like, etc. At the end of the day, just talking firewood, saw time is the least amount of time involved in the total processing of the wood, from standing tree to split wood inj the stacks. all the other steps are way more important and usually way more expensive, trucks/tractor4s/splitters, other assorted wood wrangling equipment. You might spend an extra five minutes cutting with some whizzbang hotrod saw compared to a similar sized stock saw. Whoopedy zingaroo there.
For most of us who cut just for ourselves, smallish quantities per year....factory OEM hotrod or aftermarket hotrodded saws are just cheap thrills, funzies. I got some, fun! Do I absolutely need them? Nope...Will a lb or two in my hands matter during an afternoon firewooding session? Nope....The blocks of wood off the trunk are WAY heavier usually, ha!
Anyone's 60 cc saw is gonna fill up the back of a pickup pretty quickly, any brand, stock or modded..
<<Notice how the us ope manufacturers are using torque instead of hp for their ratings now?>>
It surely has a little to do with the B&S/Tecumseh Lawsuit.
http://classactionlawsuitsinthenews...d-stratton-class-action-settlement-announced/
It surely has a little to do with the B&S/Tecumseh Lawsuit.
http://classactionlawsuitsinthenews...d-stratton-class-action-settlement-announced/
