Fish
Tree Freak
It sounds like the 270/280 is a consumer/junk model.
I thought so....
I thought so....
Stihl 260 vs new 280? Please help me decide.
- Thread starter rustyb
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
here we go again
C'mon Fish, try it, you'll like it.
Have 2 270s out with some hours on them. Owners are very happy with power after break in. Definitely smoother.
C'mon Fish, try it, you'll like it.
Have 2 270s out with some hours on them. Owners are very happy with power after break in. Definitely smoother.
oiler
Show me in anybody's owner's manual where it says to use contaminated bar oil.
I know I get the same thing here, always trying to save a buck the wrong way.
Show me in anybody's owner's manual where it says to use contaminated bar oil.
I know I get the same thing here, always trying to save a buck the wrong way.
jokers
Addicted to ArboristSite
So Jacob, are you saying that the basic construction of the 280 is like this: Cylinder which attaches to the upper half of a horizontally split crankcase, meaning there are three pieces to the whole assembly? Sounds like the Husky 350 setup which I like infinitely more than the configuration of the 025/029 or 340 and 345 Husky, or Solo 647/654 for that matter.
Russ
Russ
Russ, I believe what Jacob is saying is that the cylinder is the upper crank half. The 026 and other stihl pro saws have a right and left half appart from the cylinder just like the huskies you mentioned
Fish
Tree Freak
Can someone post a scan of the 270/280 parts blowup, so we
can let this silly discussion rest.
It sounds like a bunch of silly trekies arguing about who has the
most realistic looking phaser.
It is a given that no one here knows what they are talking
about and everyone is full of chad.
For the forums info, I only cruise here to see if any of you
girls are talking about me, I do not actually read all of this dog
poop.
Aren't you glad I said Chad, Dennis?
I have never looked at a 270/280, but am sure that it is
put together just like a 290. Am I wrong or not?
If you do not know what I am talking about, then feel free to
expound on the subject, we know who you are. It is not rocket
science, just silly chainsaws.
Is the 270/280, made like the 017/021/023/025/029/310/039,
or made like the 026/036? Do not give me a balance of both
crap!
can let this silly discussion rest.
It sounds like a bunch of silly trekies arguing about who has the
most realistic looking phaser.
It is a given that no one here knows what they are talking
about and everyone is full of chad.
For the forums info, I only cruise here to see if any of you
girls are talking about me, I do not actually read all of this dog
poop.
Aren't you glad I said Chad, Dennis?
I have never looked at a 270/280, but am sure that it is
put together just like a 290. Am I wrong or not?
If you do not know what I am talking about, then feel free to
expound on the subject, we know who you are. It is not rocket
science, just silly chainsaws.
Is the 270/280, made like the 017/021/023/025/029/310/039,
or made like the 026/036? Do not give me a balance of both
crap!
New and Improved.
It is like neither. Or is it niether. It is unique.
It is like neither. Or is it niether. It is unique.
Fish
Tree Freak
Now I can believe you, but describe a little, "unique" and
"improved".
Is this really better, or just new?
"improved".
Is this really better, or just new?
Fish. For cryin' out loud, why don't you just go to a Stihl showroom somewhere and look at one! Then you can stop telling all of us who have actually seen them that we don't know what we're talking about.
Picture an assembled crankcase from an 036. Weld the vertical seam together throughout. Vertically machine off the flywheel side flush, and saw horizontally through the crank center. Then take that part that came off the top and weld it to the bottom of the cylinder. (That last bit will look very much like the cylinder on the 029)
The oil filler cap section, and the entire flywheel casing both bolt onto the side of the bottom case, and the bar and sprocket cover attach on the other side while the cylinder/upper half bolt on the top.
It's just like the 036 only different, and just like the 029 only different. Kind of like a cross between the two.
Now you have about ten different descriptions that all say the same thing.
Picture an assembled crankcase from an 036. Weld the vertical seam together throughout. Vertically machine off the flywheel side flush, and saw horizontally through the crank center. Then take that part that came off the top and weld it to the bottom of the cylinder. (That last bit will look very much like the cylinder on the 029)
The oil filler cap section, and the entire flywheel casing both bolt onto the side of the bottom case, and the bar and sprocket cover attach on the other side while the cylinder/upper half bolt on the top.
It's just like the 036 only different, and just like the 029 only different. Kind of like a cross between the two.
Now you have about ten different descriptions that all say the same thing.
I am wondering what effect having a 1 piece cylinder upper crank half has on crank bearing temp? FWIW IMO I find the design of the 270/280 and the 029-39 saws to be geared towards cheap mfg rather than performance, servicablity, or durability.
Beavergirl
ArboristSite Operative
Fish, who is this Chad fella you're going on about? Is he also into the small engine business? Do you have pics of him? It's always nice to attach a face to a name.
Candice
Beavergirl
ArboristSite Operative
Why should our original poster spend $400.00 or more on a 026 when the Solo 651 or Dolmar 540 is out there for 300-350? I like Stihl well enough but I'm not convinced my $419.00 for an 026 is the best value for the money.
C-
C-
jokers
Addicted to ArboristSite
Hi C-, I`m not saying that the quality isn`t there on the Dolmar and Solo models that you mentioned but they are not the same as an 026/MS260. I also suspect that the 651 for that price is the SP which also can be had in Craftsman or Bailey`s green for substantially less. If you want a high quality hot rod saw that either cuts with or outcuts the 026 in the right hands get a Husky 346xp. Dozer Dan has excellent prices on them, just to name one source, and it wil be set up properly which may not be the case if you were to buy from Alamia or Southwest fastener. Of course I always recommend CCD but Dan`s prices are better on this one.
Russ
Russ
<p>Howdy<p/>
<p>I got a chance to tear into a 280 today. Glens is right, it's a cross between a 290 and a 360. The cylinder is much more like a 290, but has a magnesium bottom end instead of the engine cap. This thing is cheap though, like Bwalker mentioned, for assembly line production. The exhaust port is oval. The muffler has a matching oval flange which sits in the end of the exhaust port, just like Stihl weedeater engines. The ignition module is the same as Stihl's weedeater engines. The carb is a tuned-down Walbro HD. There's a spit-back piece which bolts over the carb and you'll have to cut it for more breathing power. The cylinder has finger ports and a steeply-angled intake port. In short, it's a cheap, consumer grade saw with a few good features. NO adjustable oiler. Spur sprocket from the factory. Plastic handlebar. Slab-sided piston which looks poorly cast. In short, save yourself a headache and buy a 260. Not the 260 pro, because you don't need a compression release. The 280 is a cheaply made, consumer grade saw. It's also going to be a high maintenance unit. Those weedeater-style ignitions don't last long. We have a lot of failures already on the FS-85 and the new "EZ-to-start" FS-55.<p/>
<p>If you need more power than a 260, buy a 440. It's almost the same weight as the 360 and the 440 has better porting and a stronger engine.<p/>
<p>I got a chance to tear into a 280 today. Glens is right, it's a cross between a 290 and a 360. The cylinder is much more like a 290, but has a magnesium bottom end instead of the engine cap. This thing is cheap though, like Bwalker mentioned, for assembly line production. The exhaust port is oval. The muffler has a matching oval flange which sits in the end of the exhaust port, just like Stihl weedeater engines. The ignition module is the same as Stihl's weedeater engines. The carb is a tuned-down Walbro HD. There's a spit-back piece which bolts over the carb and you'll have to cut it for more breathing power. The cylinder has finger ports and a steeply-angled intake port. In short, it's a cheap, consumer grade saw with a few good features. NO adjustable oiler. Spur sprocket from the factory. Plastic handlebar. Slab-sided piston which looks poorly cast. In short, save yourself a headache and buy a 260. Not the 260 pro, because you don't need a compression release. The 280 is a cheaply made, consumer grade saw. It's also going to be a high maintenance unit. Those weedeater-style ignitions don't last long. We have a lot of failures already on the FS-85 and the new "EZ-to-start" FS-55.<p/>
<p>If you need more power than a 260, buy a 440. It's almost the same weight as the 360 and the 440 has better porting and a stronger engine.<p/>
Fish
Tree Freak
Wow, I am convinced!
You guys were right all along!The saw is like a pro saw, only
different. It is like a consumer saw, only different!
It's like 2 saws in one!
Forgive me for not reading all of the swill some of you guys
produce, but I have a job, etc.
It still sounds like the saw is a piece of crap.
Hey Candice,
I like Solo and Dolmar, but there isn't a dealer here for either.
You guys were right all along!The saw is like a pro saw, only
different. It is like a consumer saw, only different!
It's like 2 saws in one!
Forgive me for not reading all of the swill some of you guys
produce, but I have a job, etc.
It still sounds like the saw is a piece of crap.
Hey Candice,
I like Solo and Dolmar, but there isn't a dealer here for either.
Thanks to all who pitched in here....
...especially Jacob for tearing the 280 down. I love the net for just this reason. I must say though that I'm disapointed the 280 was not the saw I had hoped for. I really like the idea of having less vibration and the slim new design. Too bad Stihl didn't make the 280 a Pro saw instead. Oh well. I think I'll take a good hard look at the Husky 346XP now. Still haven't ruled out the 260 though.
...especially Jacob for tearing the 280 down. I love the net for just this reason. I must say though that I'm disapointed the 280 was not the saw I had hoped for. I really like the idea of having less vibration and the slim new design. Too bad Stihl didn't make the 280 a Pro saw instead. Oh well. I think I'll take a good hard look at the Husky 346XP now. Still haven't ruled out the 260 though.
Fish
Tree Freak
Turn down the lights, I transform into Chad. Put on some Polka
musack
musack
Brian, Why are you assuming I have never seen one?
Jacob validates what I suspected when I first saw the design. New wave mfg AKA throwing something together as cheaply as possible to sell for as high as possible. Makes shareholders happy I guess.
Hey, I don't think it's all bad, and it does make good business sense.
If you can make a product that performs acceptably well for a reasonable price and it conforms to all the standards the government concocts while spending all the money they've stolen from their subjects, and you can save a bit of money doing it while at the same time cutting down on warranty work, well, who can rightly find fault with that?
I had a buddy who had a '54 Dodge pickup that was still working well in '84. Is everyone crying about how they don't build them like that anymore or are they driving the new slapped-together crap?
So what if the new saws only last 12 years instead of 20? They're lighter, quieter, more fuel efficient, less prone to ruin the operator's joints/hands during prolonged use - sounds good to me, and I'm not even a share holder (are there any Stihl Corp. shares available for purchase on the open market?).
I usually agree for the most part with Ben, but I think this condemnation was a snap judgment on his part. It may prove to be correct in the long run, but I'm willing to act like I'm Swiss at this point.
Glen
If you can make a product that performs acceptably well for a reasonable price and it conforms to all the standards the government concocts while spending all the money they've stolen from their subjects, and you can save a bit of money doing it while at the same time cutting down on warranty work, well, who can rightly find fault with that?
I had a buddy who had a '54 Dodge pickup that was still working well in '84. Is everyone crying about how they don't build them like that anymore or are they driving the new slapped-together crap?
So what if the new saws only last 12 years instead of 20? They're lighter, quieter, more fuel efficient, less prone to ruin the operator's joints/hands during prolonged use - sounds good to me, and I'm not even a share holder (are there any Stihl Corp. shares available for purchase on the open market?).
I usually agree for the most part with Ben, but I think this condemnation was a snap judgment on his part. It may prove to be correct in the long run, but I'm willing to act like I'm Swiss at this point.
Glen
